How do you like game reviews?

[xed_over]

I feel that you learn the most from the harshest reviews, as what the stronger player tells you sticks in your head better. Guess it depends on your personality though and how you handle criticism.

I suppose it does depend on the personality, because I do not learn a thing from someone I feel is belittling me. But it's probably just a mindset thing.

I suspect most people feel this way... but it is possible to change the way one accepts criticism, to learn to accept it positively -- regardless of how it might have been intended.

[gowan]

When I play a game that is not a teaching game I or my opponent might say "Shall we go over the game? We then replay the game and discuss situations which we feel are interesting, e.g. investigating possible move improvements or variations. We go on with this as far as we want, often reaching well into the endgame. Sometimes the review takes longer than the game, even when the game was a slow one

When I am the receiver of a teaching game it is usually with a pro and what happens depends on the time available and whether I am paying or not. If I'm not paying, e.g. a 3-on-1 at a congress, I would expect the pro to point out my five or so worst mistakes and a better way to play in each case. If I'm paying, it depends on how much time is available. Usually the pro decides what to tell me or work on with the time available. If it is a regular lesson situation then there may be suggestions for what to work on until the next lesson. If I'm giving a teaching game, I usually pick out several serious mistakes and discuss them in some detail, such as topics like keeping your stones connected, keeping away from strong groups, not using a weak group to attack, making your stones work together, making your move work efficiently, tenuki, balance, etc.

[Inkwolf]

At my level, it's appreciated when they explain the basic concepts I am violating.

[Joaz Banbeck]

At my level too.