let me give u examples on why bullet is bad, it depends on ur thinking extremely fast and it might result to horrible blunders most times.
For example:
1. I faced a person whose a 1500 bullet in a daily match and i won 1 game while i lost the other game
2. A 1200 rapid person beat a 1485 rated bullet player in both their daily games against them
3. A 1795 player lost to a 1400 rapid player in one match and was able to win only 1 match against the other person
4. A 1100 rapid person defeated a 1500 bullet player in one daily match and got a draw in his other match against the 1500 bullet player
a question on chess.com's rating system
Sort:
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
Agrolucario35 wrote:
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
Funny how I am the player with the most experience in this forum post but everyone is downvoting me for my advice. Care to elaborate as to why that is?
bro a rapid player is more experienced than a blitz player in my opinion, rapid players can play and win in blitz and it may take a little time, but then rapid gives more time to think giving them more understanding of the position where as in fact blitz is where u got less time to analyze the position and u have to do a move faster, possibly missing something. also blitz can be grinded later on, after ur rapid is good enough for u to grind ur blitz. bullet chess is just stupid according to me, its just ur mouse speed. rapid players are flexible. blitz players arent flexible and can lose in rapid or daily if there isnt much difference in elo.
Regardless, I am the only one rated over 2000 here (unless bigchessplayer appears). Also, how many blitz games can you play in an hour? Probably 10-12. How many rapid games in that same amount of time? Probably 3-5 (unless you just spend barely any time thinking in your rapid games like some of us do).
More games = More experience
In blitz, you are challenged with making good enough moves and keeping up with the clock. In rapid, you are so free to have so much time to think. Blitz is way more challenging for beginners and intermediates. Being 1500 blitz is way more impressive than 1500 rapid.
Also, you said that blitz rating can be grinded later once rapid rating is high enough. i think 1500 already more than high enough.
Also, could you just fix your grammar? Come on, it's so hard to understand you. :/
ok, I'll fix my grammar and yes 1500 rapid is enough to grind blitz
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
Agrolucario35 wrote:
let me give u examples on why bullet is bad, it depends on ur thinking extremely fast and it might result to horrible blunders most times.
For example:
1. I faced a person whose a 1500 bullet in a daily match and i won 1 game while i lost the other game
And what was his blitz and rapid rating? I never said anything about bullet helping you in long time controls. BTW, correspondence rating means little. Classical ratings are more meaningful. It's normal to beat a player who is much higher rated than you in live ratings in a correspondence game.
2. A 1200 rapid person beat a 1485 rated bullet player in both their daily games against them
3. A 1795 player lost to a 1400 rapid player in one match and was able to win only 1 match against the other person
4. A 1100 rapid person defeated a 1500 bullet player in one daily match and got a draw in his other match against the 1500 bullet player
Well, at beginner level (<1600), it's better to play blitz and rapid. But as you get better, bullet games start to become less nonsense. I'd say at around 1800 bullet is when they become really meaningful.
Oh and yeah, correspondence matches mean nothing. Like I said, it's normal to beat a a much higher rated player or lose to a much lower rated player in correspondence.
thats true and ok
SamuelChess321 wrote:
ok thanks for so much information
np
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
Funny how I am the player with the most experience in this forum post but everyone is downvoting me for my advice. Care to elaborate as to why that is?
I didn't down vote you but your arguments on blitz vs rapid time controls are not convincing. Actually improving at chess will always happen with longer time controls like rapid and then analysing your games afterwards.
Blitz should be secondary, if your goal is to improve long term. It's a tool to get good repetition and getting familiar with positions but ideas in blitz are superficial compared to rapid and there's less to analyze afterwards.
If you just enjoy playing blitz and dont care about improving that much (thats me), nothing wrong with that.
Also as i said rapid players have format flexibility but blitz players dont
SamuelChess321 wrote:
hii guys, so recently I made it to 1500 elo in rapid, however my bullet and blitz rating is still stuck under 1000 (well, it is true I don't play them often, but recently I tried and found myself losing to 900elo bullet players)
so I think my rapid, blitz and bullet ratings are all about my real level.............which is kinda weird.........my bullet and blitz skills are 600 elo less than rapid?? I know i am not good at mouse speed, but i don't think that matters TOO much......
so do you guys think that is normal? is a person's fast chess ratings supposed to be so different from rapid rating?
thanks for reading!
Once I was like you... My rapid rating was 2200 and blitz rating was 1400...it was just combination bad internet ,bad time scramble skill ,moving too slowly and many other factors. But for the last 6 months, after watching Naroditsky's twitch streams ,I only play blitz, bullet and it is 1800. I don't play rapid anymore and whenever I play, I feel bored and lose the game. So my actual chess skill didn't increase but my speed chess skills did. It just takes some time.
May 27, 2024
0
#30
ok 
but now I will still be grinding rapid, and try if I can reach 2000+
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
SamuelChess321 wrote:
ok but now I will still be grinding rapid, and try if I can reach 2000+
Why do you wanna be 900 blitz but 2000 rapid?
let it be bro, his wish, u told him so now leave it him!
May 28, 2024
0
#32
Hmm that guy have a point and I will still do some blitz while focusing on rapid ofc
Alexeivich94 wrote:
Rapid has a smaller player pool. Typically players have slightly higher rapid rating than blitz. Difference that big tho does mean that your skillset is clearly more suitable for longer time control.
well I guess im sticking with rapid
I think it is. But the only data I have is me & my brother which favors my conclusion. For now do not worry about it, because even Magnus Carlson isn't top 1 on bullet
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
2000 blitz is more impressive than 2000 rapid.
interesting, i dont agree though and even after all ur explainations i dont agree
SamuelChess321 wrote:
hii guys, so recently I made it to 1500 elo in rapid, however my bullet and blitz rating is still stuck under 1000 (well, it is true I don't play them often, but recently I tried and found myself losing to 900elo bullet players)
so I think my rapid, blitz and bullet ratings are all about my real level.............which is kinda weird.........my bullet and blitz skills are 600 elo less than rapid?? I know i am not good at mouse speed, but i don't think that matters TOO much......
so do you guys think that is normal? is a person's fast chess ratings supposed to be so different from rapid rating?
thanks for reading!
Look at my bullet, blitz and rapid ratings; same trend. They are different games altogether.
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
2000 blitz is more impressive than 2000 rapid.
I think being good in rapid is better than being good in blitz because it shows you have patience and the ability to think, calculate long lines and stay cool after a long time. Blitz and bullet are only good for improving reaction speed and it's really just a game of mouse speed. I don't think bullet is really chess. Oh and don't get mad over downvotes, it's just people disagreeing.
Noo0bb wrote:
TheKrugingDunnerEffect wrote:
2000 blitz is more impressive than 2000 rapid.
I think being good in rapid is better than being good in blitz because it shows you have patience and the ability to think, calculate long lines and stay cool after a long time. Blitz and bullet are only good for improving reaction speed and it's really just a game of mouse speed. I don't think bullet is really chess. Oh and don't get mad over downvotes, it's just people disagreeing.
exactly! finally someone who understands the concept
Funny how I am the player with the most experience in this forum post but everyone is downvoting me for my advice. Care to elaborate as to why that is?
bro a rapid player is more experienced than a blitz player in my opinion, rapid players can play and win in blitz and it may take a little time, but then rapid gives more time to think giving them more understanding of the position where as in fact blitz is where u got less time to analyze the position and u have to do a move faster, possibly missing something. also blitz can be grinded later on, after ur rapid is good enough for u to grind ur blitz. bullet chess is just stupid according to me, its just ur mouse speed. rapid players are flexible. blitz players arent flexible and can lose in rapid or daily if there isnt much difference in elo.