Mind your own business!
1000 ELO in Bullet, 1100 in Blitz, 2000 in Long games???
Sort:
Apr 17, 2014
0
#43
Pashakviolino wrote:
enjaytee escribió:
the site's strongest correspondence player has around 1000 points between blitz and online.
you going to "report" him? After all it's not possible that he just doesn't give two figs for chess.com ratings, is it?
What is the name of the strongest correspondance player? What is his ELO at correspondance and his ELO at blitz?
I can safely assume that if he plays Blitz regularly, then he is easily beyond 1100 points.
If someone give or not two figs about chess.com ratings is an absolutely different conversation, it has nothing to do with what is discussed here.
I am done with this thread. I reported that dude to chess.com and they will have the last word. It is a waste of time to discuss with people that genuinely believe that it is absolutely possible to play like a master in long games and play like a beginner in Blitz games.
well, he might not be the strongest, but he's the strongest titled. Obviously he's not 1100 at blitz, but he is 1000 less than his online.
you don't need to be anywhere near master level to be 2000 online. and 1100 blitz is much better than a beginner. it's not surprising, it's not unsual. Of course, computer use might be not unusual too, I don't know and don't care. I'm constantly surprised by people worrying about 'is he using a computer or not'. you're not Kramnik. He isn't Topalov. just forget it, it doesn't matter.
I spend a lot of time thinking about my moves in correspondence games. I have several lists I go through for blunder checking, positional evaluation, and tactical evaluation of the position. It is a lot of work. There is no way I could use the same process during a blitz or bullet game. My hope is that one day I can become fast enough with the process that I can use it in longer tournament games OTB. I'm not "good at tactics" and I don't have a ton of chess knowledge. So far I only have a good process that I can add in chess knowledge later on. It's also quite obvious that most opponents do not spend long on their moves. You are making quite an assumption that a 2000 rating in correspondence has some meaning for a player's OTB abilities. It's a very different situation, and it's a mistake to assume the two are similar.
Apr 18, 2014
0
#45
NathanielGraham wrote:
@Ziryab you are 450 points higher rated in online play than blitz! And 6 of your moves in your last game matched houdinis top choice! Guilty I say!
I think that I've used Houdini 1.5 on occasion. I prefer Hiarcs 12 and Stockfish 4.
Just for clarification, that was 6 moves in my last bullet game?
My current ratings are 1877 correspondence; 1546 standard; 1022 blitz (6 games); and 1522 tactics.
I suppose that if I played blitz for a while my rating would improve as I developed the entirely different techniques which I see demonstrated and discussed for that form of the game. But for now 1000 is a fair evaluation of my level.
The tactics score goes up and down and from what I have read on the forums if I was a paying member the score would be likely to rise. But for now 1500 or so is a fair evaluation.
Your suspicions are misplaced. They say quite a bit more about you than about those of whom you harbour them.
One can play live chess(especially bullet) by fingers not by brain,so his live chess rating can as low as possible. Like me,I thinks slowly. Much slower than the youngster.I need a lot of concentration and accurate. When I play live chess, I always blunder.
Meantime,one can play correspondence chess very conscientious.For example,analyse on chessboard for one hour just for one move. So ,if you devote some 30 hours on every game, you can get a very high rating .
I also see correspondence games as a much better learning tool. There is no point in analyzing a blitz game. A longer time control live game would be useful, but I rarely have time to spend hours at a time. But I can do 20 minutes today, 1 hour tomorrow, and feel good about my correspondence play.
Apr 18, 2014
0
#50
People saying that it's possible to play online chess as a high level by devoting a lot of attention and care to it are obviously right.
Unfortunately, there are also some members who get those results simply by cheating. As mentioned earlier, dozens of those are banned every day... So you can't blame people from becoming suspicious... 
I have a decent rating at long time control games and a low rating for bullet/blitz because I use live chess to test out openings. Also I really hate not having enough time to think.
Apr 18, 2014
0
#52
I'm a slow thinker also, so if I did TT and Blitz I'd probably rate 600-700 points lower than my slow-chess. The players that intrigue me are those that have a Bullet rating of 2700 and a slow-chess rating of 2000, or players with 2300 FIDE ratings and have slow on-line rating below 2000 (without sandbagging etc.). They obviously have a very casual approach to their slow on-line games.
the felow is a fraud sir avoid him
Hikaru Nakamura has a sub 1300 blitz rating and a nearly 3000 bullet rating. He must be cheating. Honestly though, I think people's correspondence ratings tend to be a few hundred points higher than their blitz ratings in the first place, so that accounts for some of it. Futhermore, I think a big part of someone's online chess "strength" is just how much time they spend working out their moves. If there are two players playing correspondence, one is rated 1500 otb and the other 2000, if 2000 rated player spends ten seconds on each of his moves and the 1500 rated player spends an hour, I think the lower rated player would win. A lot of people on chess.com just don't spend much time thinking about their moves in online chess, and players who care more take advantage of that. I just played a 1300 rated player who blundered his queen on the third move play the Scandinavian defense. He didn't even bother looking at a database to see how people play his chosen opening!
Apr 18, 2014
0
#55
GMTkdriverx wrote:
I am exactly the same way. I seem to do worse in blitz or timed games (less than 15 minutes per side for a game), possibly because of the added pressure of having to finish the game after a certain amount of time. But as for Correspondence (1-14 days per MOVE), there is no rush, so you can take your time.
Also, blitz and bullet chess are based mostly off of natural moves. Not much thought goes into it.
An interesting case, illustrating the point I made above about cheaters probably coming back very soon after they're kicked by chess.com. That's why banning dozens a day is probably less efficient than it sounds...
minor7b5 wrote:
Hikaru Nakamura has a sub 1300 blitz rating and a nearly 3000 bullet rating. He must be cheating. Honestly though, I think people's correspondence ratings tend to be a few hundred points higher than their blitz ratings in the first place, so that accounts for some of it. Futhermore, I think a big part of someone's online chess "strength" is just how much time they spend working out their moves. If there are two players playing correspondence, one is rated 1500 otb and the other 2000, if 2000 rated player spends ten seconds on each of his moves and the 1500 rated player spends an hour, I think the lower rated player would win. A lot of people on chess.com just don't spend much time thinking about their moves in online chess, and players who care more take advantage of that. I just played a 1300 rated player who blundered his queen on the third move play the Scandinavian defense. He didn't even bother looking at a database to see how people play his chosen opening!
Yes.I agree with you. I think a big part of someone's online chess "strength" is just how much time they spend working out their moves.
One of my friends beat me many time in live chess. But his correspondence chess rating is much lower than me ,because he plays correspondence chess very quickly,he joined every tournament of team china,plays hundreds of games simultaneously.Finishes thousands of games a year.
On the contrary,I played very slowly(
| Time/Move: | 1 days 18 hr |
|---|
) devoted a lot of attention and care to every game, so my rating is much higher .
Banning dozens a day isn't efficient, its mad.
The strongest correspondence player of chess.com is
mrbill
His online rating is 2597,bullet rating 1466,blitz 1646,standard rating 1652.
almost 1000 lower.
The second strongest correspondence player of chess.com is
The_Evil_Ducklings
His online rating is 2542,but his standard rating is merely 1428.
Click 'chess.com',on the top left, you will find a list of top 5 players (bullet ,blitz ,correspondence).
- #1
NM Bill Evans (2597) - #2 FM Roger LaFlair (2542)
- #3 FM Marko Makaj (2517)
- #4 NM Mark Bohannon (2514)
- #5 FM Akkhavanh Vilaisarn (2505)
I have already reported him to the chess.com staff. We will see what they say.
As for the price, I can send you via PM who is the dude I am accusing, and....I will do it for free!!!
Some of you can continue defending him finding excuses, "Oh maybe he is so nervous when he plays blitz", "oh maybe he just hates bullet", "Maybe this and maybe that".
As I stated before, someone that is a legit 2000 in long games is actually a pretty good player. And a player of that level will never have only 1100 at Blitz, no matter how nervous he can get or how slowly he moves his pieces, or how much he hates Blitz etc.
I would like a lot to watch some of his games in Bullet and Blitz to see what kind of moves he makes. I have not analyzed with a computer his games in long chess so I do not know how many coincidences he has with a software etc. but at first sight you can see that he is actually very very strong.
And someone as strong as that will not be a 1100 in Blitz, you can say whatever you want.
Where is your evidence for such claims? Perhaps you have done testing with people that have anxiety issues? Yes it is a rare situation that you describe but you're going to need a lot more than a hunch to say that such a scenario is impossible.
At any rate I don't see why you deemed it necessary to do more than to report the player and move on. This thread really won't solve anything.