A Vote on how lame you think Correspondence is?

This "disconnect" is my initial beef with correspondence.  I've been convinced that you lose more games in correspondence simply because you didn't take enough time to re-enter the game than because of these disconnects.  Ziryab said that he often remembers the game and his old plans as he looks at the game again, this happens to me as well, however, your added input, demonstrates what I go through sometimes when my intial plans in correspondence are faulty, and when I make my move really fast because I already "worked it out" I find it was an error.  This actually occurs otb as well, but in the case of correspondence, you have a greater chance to catch your mistakes because you have more time to recheck your intial conclusions.  I would say before making a move, even though, you worked it out, you should check again to see if it is sound!  

I recall a game this happened to me in.  My opponent managed to get a passed pawn, but I analyzed the position and found I had a dynamic advantage over his king.  I could checkmate him!  Of course later when it was time to make my move I found a way for him to get out of it!  So I had to rethink my line, and found a better one.  The better one wasn't a mating sequence like before, but was a long drawn out win that took advantage of the fact that he had not way to attack my king while I got another queen of my own and the game would go into the endgame and I woud be victorious because I had another passed pawn.  Of course after calculating all of that in my head practicing my board vision, he loses to the simple back rank mate he was suppose to defend against!  

I remember again where I calculated a nice checkmate after sacing two pawns, but I found later he could simplify the position to where the postion wouldn't be mating anymore because I would not have my important dark squared bishop because it would have been traded off...  All these things you don't see in the analyse portion you see later!  I've found you often make mistakes when you only look at one move your opponent can do and don't at first consider other possibilities so you can rule out a stupid choice of your opponent, like another game where I thought he would take with another pawn than he did in game, imagine my surprise... now, because of my incorrect analysis, I don't have the pawn center I was enjoying in my original position, and he king is relitivly safe.  

Because of this in the future I will try and remember to check all possible candidate moves of my opponent before calculating lines that will probably not even occur because there was a better candidate move.

I will say this though Ziryab, sometimes, after the disconnect of a day or so, and looking over the postion again, I at least, am sometimes tempted to make the move faster than I ought to, because I sometimes think it's an "easy fix" but it actually isn't.  I guess this sort of thing happens less to you because you are a stronger player, but it happened to me in the game that caused me to write this thread.  I wouldn't dismiss this as a thing only weaker players do simply because it can happen to you... so be wary :D  

In conclusion, I would say that X_player raises a good point, about the "disconnect." This sort of thing may not happen as much to a stronger players because they think about their moves more than us poor smucks who often just make the first move that comes to our mind even after reading from Dan Heisman that they must not do this!  

I think practice on making slow moves is a must as well, especially if you are accustomed to only playing blitz like me.  Apparently I play too fast,sometimes.... not all the time, but sometimes.  It's those "sometimes" that's stopping me from acheiving 1700 on correspondence :(.

My rating went up over 100 points when I stopped making the move that I thought I remembered planning at 5:30 am before coffee. One hour won't make a difference. Coffee first.

sir, i don't think you are allowed to use chess engines during your correspondence games. only some standard websites for your opening like www.365chess.com. well, i play like this my correspondence games. 

i have finished less than 10 correspondence games and i have recently taken it more seriously and i gotta tell you i am learning a lot because i get to analyse deeply(for my standards) and come up with interesting resources during my game. in live chess i don't feel motivated to analyze my games after it is finished so correspondence chess helps me overcome this problem

Engine use is permitted at ICCF, but not chess.com. Where engine use is banned, a small percentage of players are cyborgs until they get caught and banned. 

Thank you for the welcome and advice. I appreciate the varying opinions on this topic. I'm in the same boat as telsa1, having finished fewer than 10 correspondence games here. I guess now is a bad time to admit I like to have a glass of wine (or two) while playing in the evening. I'm counting that as simulating real conditions since I usually have a drink when playing in the restaurant too.

In all seriousness, I appreciate the notion of trying to simulate real time play. Real time is all I ever played for decades, from the time my dad taught me to play when I was a kid, so I feel fairly confident that my correspondence games aren't going to negate that experience. If anything, CC encourages me to do some analysis, which, quite honestly, I've been lazy about my whole life.

Eventually I'll try out some standard games on here - I'll probably go through and try everything at least once - but first I need to figure out when to set aside the time. Thanks again for the welcome!

I played the following game after a wine tasting that turned into an unexpected eight ounces instead of the usual five. I was twenty minutes late for the start of round two (game in two hours + 5 second delay). Because I was late, I played aggressive.