Using Statistics on Your Opening Repertoire as a First Step in Identification of Your Playing Style

I don't have answers for this process but I do have questions about procedures I would use.

I'm looking for a process using Chessbase.

I know how to isolate the ECO codes and use the statistics function. 

I know how to isolate a rating range -- example weaker, equal strength, stronger -- to find my results versus these three classes of competition.

My assumption is that I will find the answer within the ECO codes where I have the greatest winning percentage. Is that assumption valid? Why or why not? 

If the assumption is valid, what particular features, in those games won within the ECO codes, should I be looking for to give me clues in this quest? 

Thank you for your time. 

Wrong Approach!

Database Statistics is not a valid basis for choosing the right opening.

There are a finite number of good responses.  Good, and sound enough to not be busted are NOT the same thing.

Take defending against 1.e4.  There are 4 moves that are better than the other 16.  Those 4 are 1...e5, 1...c5, 1...e6, and 1...c6.

The fact that 1...c5 scores slightly better than the other 3 in databases does not make it the best response.  You need to UNDERSTAND, NOT MEMORIZE, the opening you play!  If you can't understand it, it is useless.

The French scores about a percent and a half lower than the Sicilian at the GM level, but I fully understand the French FAR better than the other 3, and my own results are a lot better with the French than the other 3 responses, despite what some stupid database might say.

To someone else, the French makes no sense at all, and for them, 1...e5, 1...c5, or 1...c6 is better.

Thelmposter

" I would look for drawn games that show the least mistakes and inaccuracies within the last 2 or 3 years. This would show playing style from that population of games.  "

One could argue that games with the least mistakes and inaccuracies are correlated with understanding and that these variables are also correlated with an affinity for playing style -- regardless of the game result. So this is new information to shed light on this issue. 

" Their style of play is independent of the results of the game.  " 

I'm not sure that I agree with that statement and I'm not sure that the one above agrees with it either. 

ThrillerFan

From the look of these two comments:

"There are a finite number of good responses.  Good, and sound enough to not be busted are NOT the same thing."

"You need to UNDERSTAND, NOT MEMORIZE, the opening you play!"

I'm not sure you understood my question because these are answers to what I did not ask. 

The first step of the process is to define the different types of playing style.

Hopefully, you'll see rather quickly just how silly it is.

If I play the same openings as the top GMs, I have a similar style as them. Yet, my style is more in line with the average patzer at the later stages of the game.

Thelmposter

"I claim consistency not style....we have no relative comparison to gauge consistency..."

And from there you start an argument to support this new addition to the discussion. It's confusing and I don't care to read more of that explanation. Simply put, I would say that you are saying there is no way to quantify style. I will politely disagree with that premise but I do agree with PerpetuallyPinned in that the playing styles have to be accurately defined first. This process is well beyond what I would expect to be anywhere near solved in this type of forum. Thank you for your time anyway. 

Both of those statements are relevant to what you ask UNLESS your English is so bad that you do not even know what you ask.

You claim to have a database of what you imply to be your own games.  You seem to think that your best results imply that is your style.  I am saying that is hogwash.

The finite number of good openings statement is relevant to your question because let's say your best results come in ECO Code B22 with Black.  This does not make the Black side of the c3-Sicilian your style.  It could simply mean the opponents you play do not know what they are doing.  If you are say, a dragon player, and your B22 results are better than your B70-B79 results, that does not make B22 your playing style.

In terms if the finite good openings, let's say your best black results come from A00.  That could be you beating bad openings, like 1.f3, 1.h4, etc and again have nothing to do with your style.

The "Understand" part of it comes from, using myself as an example, take the French as Black.  My best results come from C01 (Exchange).  Does this make the Exchange French my "style"?  No!  It can mean I simply understand it better than the clowns that play it.  The exchange is OFTEN played by those that are clueless and do not understand the French at all, and only a handful play it with intent.  So the high results are not due to style, but due to having a better UNDERSTANDING of the position.  I can tell you that if there is a style at all to describe me, I am a fan of wing attacks.  Like in the Winawer, McCutchen, Advance, Kings Indian Attack, etc, where Black usually goes for an all out attack down the Queenside, White the Kingside, and less so the open position in the middle.  However, an open game is best against the Exchange and Tarrasch, and this is where UNDERSTANDING supercedes playing style, and if you understand the opening rather than pigeon-hole yourself to a style, then your best results will no longer reflect your style, but rather, reflect what opponents that do not actually understand the opening tend to play.

For example, those that have only looked at the Ruy Lopez and are clueless otherwise tend to play:

1.e4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4, transposing to the Exchange French with 4.Nf3.

This should explain the Understanding part that I said before.  My best results as Black (C01) do not define my style of play (C02, C11, C12, C18).

Lack of opponent's understanding or simply bad opening choices by the opponent can lead to ECO codes where your results are best and have nothing to do with determining your own style based off of that database info.

It has been a while since this thread was active, but I have a comment...

Results do not come from opening choices unless your opponent makes a serious blunder in the opening. That does not happen often in serious games.

If you want to see how well you are at the end of the opening, though, then I recommend checking the engine evaluation after your 10th or 12th move. This will show you which openings tend to result in the most favorable position after the opening phase is complete. It will also show you which variations cause you the most problems.

Bear in mind, though, that this does not always correlate with the overall result. How many times were you much better after the opening and then blew a beautiful blitz game with an outright blunder in the middlegame or endgame because of time pressure? Also, how many games were you on the ropes and then your opponent blew it and handed you a win?

Looking at your games around the 10th or 12th move also allows you to see which openings lead to positions you like or dislike. Those like/dislike positions are the biggest clues to your “style” because style is largely about preference.

That’s a great point!

I use the chess.com explorer, master game database and even review my statistics and that’s how I came up with a repertoire.

Getting a playable or enjoyable middle game was my aim.