I've never encountered anyone unpleasant in rapid. And only rarely in bullet and blitz. I must be lucky.
Road to 1600 Rapid, trying to improve after every game.
Sort:
Game 70
Black
"Staring down the Blumenfeld attack"
In this game I faced some kind of trappy sideline of the Scotch game (The Blumenfeld attack), and I came out worse from the complications. Had I realized the central role whites` c3 knight played in his overall plan i could have avoided some critical mistakes I made. This opponent spent a little bit of time thinking, but never more than 1,5 minutes on a single move. He would have won had he paced himself a little bit and not gotten overly eager. This seems to be a common theme, even in critical positions people just spend the same amount of time, like it doesn`t occur to them that they have the luxury to think. Anyways, good for me. I find great joy in a good swindle.
This is a trap line which is good to know, it relies on black getting greedy and giving up king safety for what seems like a very aggressive attack. Next time I`ll play it conservatively and play against the doubled central pawns instead of sending my queen off to some distant Narnia dreamland.
This is a trap line which is good to know, it relies on black getting greedy and giving up king safety for what seems like a very aggressive attack. Next time I`ll play it conservatively and play against the doubled central pawns instead of sending my queen off to some distant Narnia dreamland.
Game 71
White
" A good Scotch"
I`ve taken to enjoying the Scotch opening as it can brutally punish pawn-grabbers. I didn`t play optimally this game, since I didn`t see how brutal Nd2 was after the queen came down to grab my pawn. But that just means I`ll know what to do next game this happens. Because it will definitely happen again. People just love pawns. I`m not particularily proud of this win as my opponet blundered into it, but the tactic I won with was just so cool in my opinion 
Game 72
White
"A bad Scotch"
In this game I blew the win a whopping 3 times. I spent way too much time in the opening and got into time trouble. Two key takeaways: 1) If the opponents king is still in the middle, look at unsupported pawn breaks more closely. 2) If the opponents king is on the ropes disregard material values completely and just consider whether or not you can open more lines of attack on the king.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
In the future I have to try to de-attach myself completely from being affected emotionally by how my opponent is playing. It somehow annoys me that people hope-chess, play 15/10 and treat it like it is 3/0, and play dubious opening moves. It annoys me because I`m thinking that I HAVE to win, because my opponent isn`t following some sort of formula. I should just not care about those things and focus on the position. My opponent can run his clock up to 20 minutes for all I care.
Game 73
White
"Give me another chance"
This game was weird in that I played relatively well positionally but fell flat on my face tactically. Even though I have around 2100 tactics rating, it doesn`t help much. In the tactics trainer you know you have a tactic, but in a real game you usually have to set up a tactic. I can smash but I can`t serve to use an analogy from volleyball. That is to say, I need to do some serious work on my positional play, and try to start thinking in terms of square control instead of waiting for my opponent to hand me a tactic. In this game I worried unecessarily about threats which my opponent didn`t have. Most notably I thought my attack would falter if my opponent took my front rook on f3 so I desperately tried to set up discovered attacks and set up control of adjacent files, but the opposite was the case. If my queen would have been allowed to take the leading role in the battery black would have been in for a world of pain, so in practice my doubled rooks were untouchable.
Aug 6, 2019
0
#167
Giasira wrote:
Game 72
White
"A bad Scotch"
In this game I blew the win a whopping 3 times. I spent way too much time in the opening and got into time trouble. Two key takeaways: 1) If the opponents king is still in the middle, look at unsupported pawn breaks more closely. 2) If the opponents king is on the ropes disregard material values completely and just consider whether or not you can open more lines of attack on the king.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
In the future I have to try to de-attach myself completely from being affected emotionally by how my opponent is playing. It somehow annoys me that people hope-chess, play 15/10 and treat it like it is 3/0, and play dubious opening moves. It annoys me because I`m thinking that I HAVE to win, because my opponent isn`t following some sort of formula. I should just not care about those things and focus on the position. My opponent can run his clock up to 20 minutes for all I care.
I have published a blog post about your game, you can find it here. I hope you find my comments helpful. 
GaborHorvath wrote:
Giasira wrote:
Game 72
White
"A bad Scotch"
In this game I blew the win a whopping 3 times. I spent way too much time in the opening and got into time trouble. Two key takeaways: 1) If the opponents king is still in the middle, look at unsupported pawn breaks more closely. 2) If the opponents king is on the ropes disregard material values completely and just consider whether or not you can open more lines of attack on the king.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
These "insights" should be obvious but it is really hard to implement them when in an actual game. This game was very psychological. My opponent moved very fast yet again. I felt like if I would give up material my fast-moving opponent would "win" and get what he wanted. Ironically he DID get what he wanted because I was too scared to give up material, I got into serious time trouble (seconds left) and blundered badly.
In the future I have to try to de-attach myself completely from being affected emotionally by how my opponent is playing. It somehow annoys me that people hope-chess, play 15/10 and treat it like it is 3/0, and play dubious opening moves. It annoys me because I`m thinking that I HAVE to win, because my opponent isn`t following some sort of formula. I should just not care about those things and focus on the position. My opponent can run his clock up to 20 minutes for all I care.
I have published a blog post about your game, you can find it here. I hope you find my comments helpful.
Your blog post was very helpful indeed. I knew I was winning, but didn`t know I was super winning, so I didn`t feel like I could just play any move. I had the feeling I had to find the exact best moves or risk blowing my advantage. I didn`t spend my time wisely and felt a lot of psychological pressure. In the end it was just about tactics though, and it was embarrasing to me that I didn`t find the win despite having around 2100 tactics rating.. but that is the effect of feeling pressured by time and perfectionism :/
DaddyReza wrote:
Checkout John Bartholomew's series on clock as a weapon. He also has similar problem of getting in time trouble. He plays a few blitz games in every session of that series, it has helped him deal with this problem. Just thought it might help you.
I`m a big fan of John Bartholomew and i subscribe to him on Youtube. I don`t find clock as a weapon series particularily instructional though, because as he plays 3/0 blitz it comes down to a lot of opening theory and he can`t explain the purpose behind each move well
Aug 7, 2019
0
#170
Giasira wrote:
DaddyReza wrote:
Checkout John Bartholomew's series on clock as a weapon. He also has similar problem of getting in time trouble. He plays a few blitz games in every session of that series, it has helped him deal with this problem. Just thought it might help you.
I`m a big fan of John Bartholomew and i subscribe to him on Youtube. I don`t find clock as a weapon series particularily instructional though, because as he plays 3/0 blitz it comes down to a lot of opening theory and he can`t explain the purpose behind each move well
I used to watch his climbing the rating series, but now he uploads only 5 + 5 games 
But it has a great list of videos with a lot of content. I would say that I raised at least 200-400 points on chess.com just by following some of his advice.
Chessnetwork also has many interesting lessons and ideas about tactics and things like that.
And if you have problems with the clock I recommend you Chessable. When I started playing chess, about 4 years ago, I had a blitz and bullet score of 1100-1200 on this site (another account) and lately I have improved a lot thanks to Chessable. The courses of finals, tactics and openings are very helpful and if you practice daily your brain absorbs a lot of positions and you play much faster.
Aug 7, 2019
0
#171
Gary Kasparov - “At a decent to strong club level, games will be decided by 90-95% tactics.” (As opposed to positional play).
My advice would be to know the basic theory for your opening(s), but study tactics without fail. Pattern recognition is key.
My advice would be to know the basic theory for your opening(s), but study tactics without fail. Pattern recognition is key.
Game 74
Black
"Crying on the inside, passing on the outside"
This game was one of the most intense I`ve ever played. At the worst I had 2 seconds on the clock versus my opponents 12 minutes, and was surviving purely on increment and tenacity. It seemed my opponent just didn`t know what to do against outside passed pawns and as my pawn roller on the kingside thundered closer to the backrank to win the game I couldn`t believe my poor eyes. It was a moment of beauty, it was a testament to the tenacity of the human will.. who am I joking? I won this travesty by pure luck, but I will take it thank you very much...
Nice one. I remember playing down a piece and getting a draw from two unconnected passed pawns on the c and e files. The reason I remember was that I was playing an 1800 otb and had no business doing anything but losing that game! Passers are some of the most dangerous swindle material.
That being said, the passed pawns on the 6th and seventh row are of limited objective value, and unfortunately probably not worth a piece.
WilliamShookspear wrote:
Nice one. I remember playing down a piece and getting a draw from two unconnected passed pawns on the c and e files. The reason I remember was that I was playing an 1800 otb and had no business doing anything but losing that game! Passers are some of the most dangerous swindle material.
That being said, the passed pawns on the 6th and seventh row are of limited objective value, and unfortunately probably not worth a piece.
And I wasn`t well placed to start a kingside attack, so the fact that white`s king became exposed was also of no value, hence Stockfish giving +3 to white despite white only having a piece for two pawns. But hey, as long as I learn from my mistakes it`s all gristle for the mill right . I`ll look into a gambit line for the Bird`s opening, because I suspect the reason it`s not very popular is because white exposes the king very early. In the daily game I played I ran into a very dangerous kingside attack from the Birds` which is the whole point of the opening (much like the Dutch defence for black). Next time I`ll try a gambit like 2.e5 (Froms gambit) against the Bird and punish white for opening the king
Froms is reasonable and good to learn
Well played. I didn´t like your opponent´s Rc1. You always must try stop the pawns from behind.
congrandolor wrote:
Well played. I didn´t like your opponent´s Rc1. You always must try stop the pawns from behind.
Yes, my opponent was trying to flag me, so the fact I had to play on increment actually helped me this game. I guess he was worried that if he used more time to think I would be able to build my time up again. Ironically I played better under time pressure than when I had time xD
Game 75
White
"Stumbling in the masters` steps"
I got another chess book in the mail. Bobby Fischers "My 60 memorable games". In the very first game he encounters a Siciliian with an early e6 and Qc7 so I decided to pay homage to that game with a Kings Indian Attack setup despite knowing absolutely no theory in that system. I failed to play correctly for the centre and blundered a pawn. Despite that I managed to defend and had an opportunity to gain the initiative with an endgame tactic. I missed it and also missed the opportunity to draw the game. Somehow I still can`t stand the thought of playing for a draw, as if losing with guns blazing is somehow better (which it is not, especially when the opponent has a passed rook pawn with a rook behind it)
For those who are curious, here is a link to a walkthrough of game 1 in that book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg5GvWm-0kE
Game 76
Black
"Alsjeblieft"
This loss was quite painful. I was so ashamed of myself. I actually went to bed and played through this game in my head. I mean, I`m obviously not some kind of chess genius, I can`t keep track of more than a few moves blind. But I was thinking in terms of "if white doesn`t fianchetto in the Dutch, I can do it myself to support Ne4".. and "I could have played c5 to challenge the centre and try to prepare e5" As I lay there pondering I swore an oath, "I will learn to play the Dutch, and I will learn to play it well". I know the general advice is to stick to d4 d5 for beginners and beginner-intermediate players. But I watched GM Simon Williams 5 part series on the Dutch opening and I have to say it re-ignited the chess fire in me. I was starting to get de-motivated with chess, but now I`m definitely stoked to play more chess. I want to play a brilliant Dutch game. After this game I have to get vengeance.
I'm certainly no expert but in your last two games it looks like you are dropping pawns quite easily. Maybe try counting enemy attackers and defenders every time before making a move could help. E.g. in game 76, you moved your bishop to defend the attacked pawn on d6, but your bishop was already defending the pawn on a5, so you lost that pawn. You could have instead, moved the queen to defend d6. In game 75, you commented yourself that you dropped the pawn on move 12 because you blocked your own defender (the rook) with the bishop move to e3 lowering your defenders to 1, whereas he had 2 attackers.
Anyway, love the format of this post, keep it up and good luck with your games!
https://www.chess.com/live/game/3919624581
OK, please tell me how my opponent is rated 1440. If he is, then why am I rated so low?
There are tons of people playing 15/10 who treat it as blitz or bullet and try to win on time. I have even seen people doing that in 30/0. Though in 15/10 I have even faced abuse for taking time to think. There was a game last winter where my opponent kept spamming chat with abuse because I dared to spend more than 2 minutes on a move. I struggle to understand the logic of people who play rapid and then play at bullet speed and sometimes even complain about the opponents time usage. There are clubs for 30 second bullet out there..
My guess is that they got traumatized by some game where they spent too much time and lost under time pressure and now they are on some kind of vendetta to restore "justice". On the other hand, there is probably no logical explanation. People don`t tend to be very logical.
In that game the "less than 10 seconds per move" tactic that so many enjoy didn`t work out, then he just compounded the mistakes by still trying to win on time...