Should I study my opponents or just my own games?
These answers restate the rules implemented by our open-source engine, which follows the WXF laws and is regression-tested against the official 110-diagram repetition casebook. Where an answer refers to a specific position, that position lives on the linked reference page, where the build verifies it against the engine before publishing.
Direct answer
Your own games, by a wide margin, for most improving players. Studying a specific opponent pays off once you are facing the same people repeatedly at a serious level, but below that, the return on reviewing your own losses and fixing the patterns that recur across many different opponents is simply higher.
Why your own games generalise better
A mistake you make repeatedly, missing cannon screens, blocking your own horse, is going to cost you against nearly anyone. Opponent-specific preparation only pays off against that one opponent; fixing your own recurring error pays off in every future game.
When opponent study becomes worth it
Once you play the same people regularly, especially in a club or league setting, knowing what a specific opponent tends to do can be a real edge. It is a refinement on top of your own review, not a substitute for it. See what to look for in a stronger player's games for a related, more general kind of study.
Related questions
Is this different from studying strong players' games in general?
Yes, that is a separate, useful activity, more about plans than about a specific opponent's habits.
How much time should opponent prep get?
Very little until your own review is already a habit. Fix yourself before you study them.
.