Understand the move that changed your game.

Replay the game once before relying on move labels. Note where you left familiar territory, spent a lot of time or chose a move without checking a reply. If you remember what you intended, write that down. Comparing your intention with what actually happened is the most useful part of review.

Choose one turning point. Ask what the opponent threatened, which alternatives you considered and what stopped you from choosing them. An engine can identify a stronger move, but it cannot recover what you were thinking unless you supply that context.

Open Game analysis from the study board. Load a finished game or import its PGN, then run the available review. Select a reviewed move to see its evaluation, classification and alternative line. With Champion access, the move explanation appears for the selected move; changing moves changes the explanation.

Game history is included in paid personal plans. Challenger and Champion include game review. Move explanations and advanced statistics require Champion. A school or club enrollment grants assigned teaching access, rather than automatically upgrading personal review tools. Compare the current plan details before choosing an upgrade.

The review compares the move played with engine alternatives. A best move matches the engine’s leading choice; a forced move is the only legal move. Other classifications reflect the estimated loss caused by the choice. A move can give check and still be a mistake if it loses material or allows a stronger reply.

Check, checkmate, captures and promotion describe events on the board. They are different from quality judgements. A checkmate ends the game; a blunder label describes a costly decision earlier in the sequence. Always replay the line that supports the judgement rather than treating an icon as a complete explanation.

Imagine you moved a rook to an open file but left a bishop undefended. The rook move has a reasonable aim, yet the opponent can win the bishop immediately. A useful review asks whether you could defend the bishop while developing, move it with a threat or exchange the attacker.

Play through the suggested alternative and the opponent’s strongest reply. Stop when you understand the practical difference: a defended piece, a safer king or a winning ending. If the line is too difficult to follow, return to the first concrete mistake rather than trying to memorise a long variation.

Look for patterns across several games rather than drawing conclusions from a single accuracy score. Compare results, time controls and the phases of reviewed games. If many errors occur after a long opening, practise making a plan in middlegame positions. If games regularly slip away near the end, work on basic conversions and time management.

A small sample can be misleading, especially when opponents and time controls differ. Not every saved game has completed engine analysis, so reviewed-game statistics should be read alongside the amount of data behind them. Your current chess rating, puzzle results and review accuracy describe different things.

Positive evaluations favour White; negative evaluations favour Black. An evaluation can change with deeper search, and a forced mate is different from a material advantage. Chess242’s accuracy is its own measure of move quality, not a FIDE rating or a score interchangeable with another site.

Use review after a game. Assistance during a live competitive game undermines fair play and prevents the result from reflecting the players’ own decisions. A coach can use positions for discussion afterwards, including asking the learner to explain an alternative before revealing the engine line.