This is an example of the situations that I and many other reasonably strong, yet much older and slower players get into routinely when playing blitz. It is also why I, at times, have completely given up blitz for OTB games. Blitz is a strange creature. There's enough time for you to think you have time to analyze things in sufficient detail, but really you just end up in time pressure. I think I could beat myself if I gave myself time odds and played purely on instinct, vs the pretense of analysis that occurs in blitz games.
Blitz is a quick game and i think figures are eaten more quickly,than in a longer game.That doesnt give much opportunity to submit a good attack.The winner ,according to me,is the one who manages to get the better position at the end.
Another delightful example with commentary...
Sorry people, I dont agree, I love blitz!
If you are a "reasonably strong" player, you should manage to not lose pieces for no reason, and it is perfectly possible to create a lovely attack, with enough pieces involved.
I think the point of this thread is that there is a reason: time pressure. Even Anand points out that as the time controls decrease, the difference in ratings becomes more irrelevant. Blitz is really a different kind of game than chess. In fact, I would argue that 3 0 vs. 10 7 are completely different kinds of games in themselves. Look, two players can play a move that can turn out to be the correct move, but one of them played it because he thinks it's right, while the other one has played it because he has proven in right. Only one of these does well in blitz...
Heh, in my last few games of online blitz, I have employed the Bongcloud (1.e4 e5 2.Ke2) I still win a lot! The move confuses people and they run out of time thinking.
That's aptly named. Sometimes I try the Reefermunchies (1. h4 e5 2. Rh3) and it's counterpart, the Beerfart (1. a4 d5 2. Ra3).
Hi Bunkerputt...
In the first blitz game, you're still ahead after 15.) cxd4 , not 15.) Kh1
blitz is about being cool under pressure
nice info...
That's right. That's why I gave it a ??. cxd4 seems so obvious and as soon as I played Kh1, I realized it. By this time I was already in time pressure, though.
In chess in general, it's better to have a plan than not. If you have five minutes to come up with one AND execute, this axiom becomes even more important.
In the first example, you already have a piece advantage. If you take the pawn on d5 with the queen and manage to get a Q-trade, your game becomes simpler. Why let the opponent find complications in a won game?
In the other game, you did great with the pawn push on the Q-side.. the only thing you needed is to bring that extra piece to the fore... instead of taking the b3 pawn, 26 R8c8 would have anchored that, and you'd have had more resources to bring to bear.
I am not a great player, so for me simle works best if I have a little advantage, I try to simplify things and reduce the chances for counterplay. But this comes with experience. I've played 1000's of blitz games, both online and OTB. So keep at it, you'll develop the "feel" for it.
I actually play blitz to help my planning, tactics, and how to work under time pressure. Coming up with a plan quickly could reduce the quality of it, but I think it helps to think like that especially for long games. I could know my general goals quickly and then maybe refine it.
Blitz takes a lot of practice for some people. I was terrible at it for the longest time, I hated it.. Actually, I still am terrible at it! I don't have a bad rating live here on chess.com, but on ICC i struggle. IMO Long games are better for learning than blitz games. You can actually have time to evaluate the position. If you play too much blitz you may end up blitzing the long games.
blitz also helps you get many more games in for experience.
Blitz is actually great if you analyze your games afterwards with a chess engine. With this, you can learn from many of your mistakes and find better moves instantly. The trick is to play out the computer moves until you reach a point of understanding the position, and then going back and playing it out in your head until you think you can recognize the move instantly.
I myself have been playing 3 0 and 1 0 games recently on FICS. My rating was 1100 a month ago, but lately i've been doing better and have obtained winning positions against 1800 players (although I lose on time).
Just recently, I played in a tournament, and my rating was 1142 in my last tournament. My games were always the first to finish, and I beat a 1650 player by winning a rook and knight, as well as a 1321 player by a 6-move combination trading two rooks for a queen, pawn, rook and bishop.
Now that's funny LOL!!!!
I'd say anything less than 5 0 is not even chess, let alone useful. This should spark some debate! *ducks*
After playing 1 0 for awhile, 5 0 seems like more than enough time to make a plan, execute it, stir your coffee, drink it, wait for your opponent to move, and still win on time with over three minutes left on your clock.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.