15 | 10 or 45 | 45 to improve

Hi, I like playing 45 | 45

However, there are not many players so it is often hard to find a match.

I tried 15 | 10 but usually I have low accuracy rate or running out of time.

Should I give the 15 | 10 more chances to get used to it or stick with 45 | 45 ?

Maybe something else ?

Hi!

Playing 45|45 is fantastic and bravo for putting in such an effort to improve your chess. I completely understand it may be difficult to find matches because not many can or are willing to dedicate so much time to a random online chess match. I think you should continue to play both time controls, and try custom time controls like 20|20, or 25|10 or something, as you never know if someone may say ok, 45|45 is to long for me but 20|20, that I’ll do. 

Additionally you can try joining clubs and leagues online that play slower chess, I know one in particular you could try and message me about that. Last, there is always Daily chess. I know it’s not the same thing but it can be a resource to play chess where you’re focusing on playing your best without the clock telling you to hurry up.

-Jordan

Study
Alternately you can play faster time controls like 10 rapid, and then spend the time reviewing the analysis report.

Reviewing your slow moves by looking an the 5 show lines will improve you candidate move process. Also just trying to appreciate why the best move, not made by you, in the game situation, is the best move will exercise the game position thought process.

15/10 is fine as you gets opponents easily. Just review every game to see your blunders and hopefully not repeat them.

There is a 45+45 team league on  the FICS network. They are in the registration process for T84 until march 1st. The season will start on march 8th. For more info.    http://teamleague.org/

I play mostly 30. And yes, occasionally I have run out of time and lost a tough game that I should have been able to win. Oh well. I find 30 is a good time, not too long not too short

Well, there's actually ppl who take their time finding good moves, while some take 10 seconds to find a good move. We can play a 45|45 game if u want.

15|10 is good enough to improve.
"usually I have low accuracy rate or running out of time"
++ It is normal for your accuracy to go down in a shorter time control.
It is not normal to run out of time: youy always have 10 seconds to move.

30|0 min games are a good compromise between the two, for me. Anything quicker than that, and I make more mistakes rushing. Anything slower than that, and it's difficult to maintain stamina though the whole match.

#11
15|10 is better than 30|0.
Duration is about the same: for 60 moves 15|10 = 2*(15+10) = 50 minutes
30|0 = 2*30 = 60 minutes
The advantage of 15+10 is that you can always win a won position or draw a drawn position: you always have 10 seconds to move
30|0 can degrade into a dexterity contest with players trying to flag each other in e.g. K+R vs. K+R

While it is true that in 15|10 game it is more difficult to lose on time, it is not exactly the same time wise because only a handful of games last that long (60 moves). In 30|0 you generally have more time, but in games where it gets complicated, it is true that 30|0 is not a sufficient time to think of optimal moves, but neither is 15|10. So, in most cases, I would say that 30|0 is a little bit better than 15|10, if that is the debate, but neither of those is ideal.

In general, even longer games are better for improvement for most of the people, though it is true that many people refuses to play them, so that is why we say that 15|10 is the absolute minimum for those who wishes to improve (and is certainly a lot better than mostly played 10|0 time control).

Those who want a real experience of finding the best moves during the game (AKA something that resembles classical chess), should try longer games than even 30|0.

It would be great if chess.com implements something like 30|30, or 30|20 as an official time control. 

There seems to be enough people playing 60/0, which won't be too far off 45/45.

You might have to wait up to 5 min to find an opponent, but it's not too bad.

Of course it is comparable.!

My point is rather than playing a 45+45 minute game and analyzing it, one could play  x-multiple 10 minute games and analyze them, providing many more learning opportunities, proportionally spending more time studying and less playing. One advances more from study than from playing. Playing providing the fodder for studying.

I would suggest you to give 30|0 a try

Playing 10|0 and 45|45 is completely different. You are not playing the same way those 2 time controls. On every level, in 10|0 game you do not have the time to calculate as best as you can. Not even close. That is the first problem with playing 10|0 games for improvement.

In 45|45 you can calculate much more often. In most cases, in 10|0 you will just implement what you already know, with perhaps small exceptions. 


There are people who can get to some 2 000+  level here just by playing these fast time controls, but most of the people will be stuck below 1 000 if they try this approach.


For most people rated let's say 800, 10|0 is far from optimal for learning purposes. That game on that level will have many, many blunders, much more than if they play a longer game, and analyzing such a game will not be that great either, because many of the mistakes will be due to playing too fast.

So, analyzing 10|0 game is not completely pointless, but close to it, compared to a game of higher quality.

Quality beats quantity every time.
 

Hi,

It’s debatable whether quantity of games is equal or superior to quality game play and I’m certainly of the opinion it’s inferior. Many coaches always ask students to send them their OTB games over internet games for a reason. I get way more out of my 45|45 league games than casual speed chess games because I’m writing my thoughts out as I play the game and have ample time to give the positions from the game good thought, harnessing my full chess abilities so mistakes are much more significant from those games and I can review my notes to truly understand where my thought process went awry. Whereas playing some speed chess games I’ll have random mistakes that have nothing to do with my lack of abilities or understanding but are more from playing moves to quickly (forced or otherwise) and simple “oops” moments because I’m relying on my intuition rather than concrete analysis of the positions. Speed chess games have their purpose certainly but not as a replacement for long time-control play and analysis.l. If anything it’s a complementary aspect of chess practice, at least that is how I use it. 

-Jordan