A Vote on how lame you think Correspondence is?

I don't play chess here at all anymore, really.  Just votechess.  There are better sites for live chess...

And, *** people are ones who make judgments about others based on age, gender, race, etc.  End of story ;).

Well I have respect for correspondence player's.

Well I have respect for all type's of chess player's.

ihate that i'm playing a guy right now and he makes his moves really quick.  line one or two minutes.  takea  few days fella.

I kind of use it to be in many games at once but I can pause them for a few hours and do other things without pissing anyone off. I also can take a long look at a position, longer than you get to do in the 30 minute games here. Some people may find it useful and some won't...

Correspondence has been my preferred type recently while I'm learning the game.  I think some quality games can be played if the time is used for some consideration of the moves.

But I do often lose track of what my intentions were the last time I moved in a game. Luckily the playback feature and analysis modes are there to help.  

I'm quite new to the Chess.com site and wanted to contribute to a thread... this one was interesting to me. Right now I play correspondence chess because that's what the friend who recommended the site to me plays, and I signed up to play him. When I want a "realtime" game, you can find me sitting across from my husband in a restaurant actually playing on a real board, in real life, real time. But, you know, that doesn't show up on this site.

I've seen the "you're not a real X unless you Y" attitude in music, fencing, dancing and pretty much any endeavor with some delineation between amateurs (people who do it for love) and professionals (people who do it for money or official title). At some point I just learned to shrug and say "okay" and then find a partner who's more fun to play with. For people who have competitive goals in the "world of X" (chess, fencing, music, etc.) that particular activity may be the focal point of life but at least for me, chess (like music, fencing, etc.) is just a very interesting diversion. If that makes me "not a real chess player" (musician, fencer, etc), I can live with that.

Just wait until we get to live a few centuries or more and are spread out in the local system and the nearby systems.  Correspondence chess might need some even longer time controls. ;-)

at least I can keep my 1600 rating when playing over 50 games.  I was playing over 90 at one point.  I just find it annoying having to make all those moves.  I like picturing the game in my head while I am not playing.  When I am playing 90 games I cannot do that. :(

ha :P

You know my standard rating is a lot higher than my blitz rating...

I grew in the game playing only blitz, yet I for some reason developed good long game skills, probably because I don't play for time, I just play to make the best move, all the time.  There are times though when I am playing someone of equal skill and it comes down to it, I play a little for the clock, mainly because if I don't I know I'll lose because I don't have a checkmate anytime soon and usually when I play against him it's usually won by time because mate simply isn't there and there isn't enough time to play the entire game because the game went well over 40 moves.

I've looked at games my opponents played in correspondance, and it's the same story as me.  When they win, usually, it's because their opponent made a ridiculous blunder, and when they lose, vice versa.  Hardly ever you see a game where it is one by end game skills, though that does happen occasionally.  I just see it in other players as well as me.  Ridiculous blunders seem to be riddled in everyones correspondence.  Anyone care to object?  I think the reason for that is your mind is not in the game because you constantly have to leave the game inbetween moves, and often forget the critical tactics of the position, sometimes costing you the game, because you forgot your bishop was on pre last move...

I see a mix between people who like Correspondence and people who hate it.  I think more people hate it, or just arn't interested in taking it seriously.  

So here is the challenge.  If someone believes their account shows that what I said isn't true, that a huge chunk of their wins are not due to idiotic blunders their opponents made, and a huge chunk of their losses where not due to idiotic blunders they made, then tell me, and I will look at your profile and see for myself.  I'm dying to find someone that doesn't fall into this category.  Hopefully someone will answer the call...

 Depends on what you think of as idiotic. All losses are clearly the result of errors, although said errors may only be such in retrospect. At the time the move is made it may seem sensible. My opponents do not drop pieces often, but errors are made. Usually concession of a key square or disadvantageous minor piece imbalance.

My correspondence games aren't riddled with blunders because of the time controls. At my level we just kinda suck.

But if your underlying point is that it's possible to forget some key subtlety in the span of several days, I think that's plausible.

However in my case, post-game analysis of my correspondence games and quick games shows that my blunders, mistakes, and inaccuracies increase across the board in OTB and quick. Same for the correspondence games in my archive that were actually played quickly.

So for me personally, not taking the time to mull over the position seems far more detrimental than the risk of forgetting something later.

Perhaps it might be because that is what happens at my level.  At your level there arn't as many blunders.  Maybe the answer is to just get better at chess :O

hmmmm, your probably right.

I'm actually winning and losing.  I just don't like losing simply because I cannot get my mind back into the game after like 2 days of not playing it :O.  The point of this thread was to find out how many people shared these feelings, not to trade insults.

I don't play much blitz on chess.com anymore.  I'd much rather play games with 10 minute time controls now, but anyway, I still don't play enough of those.  The only reason why i got into blitz was because my friends only like to play blitz so we play blitz.  I go to the mall sometimes to play long games with other people, those are fun to.  

I'm still not very good at blitz, even after playing it for so many years.  

I actually shouldn't be talking smack about correspondence, because I've learned d4 simply by playing it on correspondence.  I would have never had the guts to just start playing d4 on blitz only after reading about the opening from my book.  

After reading a few responses I think I might still play correspondence, but I probably won't play 90+ games anymore at the same time!  What I am going to do is finish the games I am playing and look through and Analyze all of my games, and cross-reference the games I played with master games of the same opening. 

I personally don't like blitz as much as games with longer time controls simply because there just isn't enough time to finish the game a lot of times because there is no checkmate and the game often gets dragged over 40 moves and it's just a matter of whoever moves faster wins.  That to me is not real chess, and that is why I want to start playing games with longer time controls.  For a while I thought correspondence was just a big joke because the time controls are way to long, and often I don't even spend more than a second or two thinking about my moves, and often lose games because of it.  I think Correspondence requires the dicipline of not rushing to press the submit button!  That's easier said than done, not rushing to press the submit button.  

Actually the game in question that got me all worked up to post this thread, I lost, not because it is a "correspondence game," but because I didn't analyze what would happen after I moved by bishop to d3.  Instead I was just blindly attacking his knight.  I wasn't thinking what would happen if he checked me with his dark squared bishop after I moved my bishop to a square it was semi in danger in because if he moves that bishop, then his queen would be in line with my light squared bishop on d3, and the best move I had to stop his check was a move that blocked the line between my queen and my bishop on d3, blocking the pathway, so he could now just grab a piece.  Of course I could take his dark squared bishop with my bishop next move, but I didn't see that, because, I pressed the submit button too quickly!  :O, still, I didn't like my position after analyzing it throughly in my head, mainly because he could take my queen next move and then I would lose castling rights.  That was the first time I encountered that opening.  A better move instead of d3 I know now was e2, because now when he gives the check my bishop isn't hanging.  That's the move I should have done.  I guess in that opening his hopes where to do cheapo's like that.  Oh well, lesson learned.  I shouldn't have blamed correspondence for this, but my lack of poor judgement in applying tie break criteria to a tactically dominant position.

I wanted to tell you something since you said you were quite new to this site.

Firstly, I do not agree with some people on this forum who like to disparage others.

I believe every player who puts an effort into being the best should not be belittled!

It takes skills to play long time control games and it takes skills to play short time control games.

Skills are required in all situations whether it is skills of time management or skills of finding the best move.

At the end of the day it takes chess skill!

I wanted to comment to you is because you said you often like to play real time games with your husband in a restaurant!

The reason I am bringing this up is because I want to give you some chess advice which can help you beat your husband down HA HA!

Your a chess.com member lol so you got back up support HA HA!

The advice I would like to give you is to mix in some Live Classical/Standard Chess Games into your chess development!

Correspondence Chess has good sides and bad sides to it!

Which many people of the chess community believe to be of fact.

In Correspondence Chess there is something called a Disconnection!

The Disconnection I am refering to is a situation were your mind disconnects from your chess position.

I will give you an example of what I mean by that as well.

Example:

Lets say you are playing a 5 day per move game.

Lets pretend you are black in this position.

Now the below moves were played on day 1

After your move 2...Nc6 your opponent than decided to wait 3 day before making the move 3.Bc4!

Now here is the point I am trying to make!

For 3 days your mind has been thinking of other stuff!

The reason why is because your mind has disconnected from the chess position!

A seperation has happend!

Now this Disconnection I am speaking of has its good points and it has some bad points.

The good points is it allows you the chance to relook at the position fresh.

Gives you a chance to find a better move.

Overall this disconnection can help your quality of play.

However, there is a down side to this disconnection!

In a real life chess game you are not going to have such a Disconnection!

Usually you will have a continuous flow of thought on chess.

Long Story Short you want to try and simulate the same chess conditions!

If you play real time games with your husband which last 1 hour than try and set up a Live Standard Game against someone for 1 hour to simulate the same condition!

Yeah that would be my advice to mix some Standard Games in.

I once asked for tips on correspondence chess!

I made a forum and one of the tips they said was think of a move you want to play.

Than write it down somewhere.

Than come back the next day to see if you still like that move!

The reason they do it is because sometimes you will look at the position and think of a move.

Than once you have a disconnection from the game you will come back and realize your move you was thinking of playing at that time was a huge mistake!

I would like to leave you with one of my forums which I created for tips!

Yeah I wanted to try correspondence chess as well before so I made a forum asking for tips and I believe I got a lot of different ones.

Very good ones in fact!

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/correspondenceonline-chess-encouragementtips

Lastly, I would like to say:

Beat your husband for the little kids on chess.com!

Think of the little ones!

WOOOT WOOOOOT

Yes this is what I mean though.

For example:

Lets say you have a plan in a position.

When you have a disconnection from the board you will come back to the board and relook at the board fresh.

Sometimes when you do that you find errors in plans you originally thought!

You review your notes and say to yourself what on earth was I thinking?

That plan will not work its a good thing I didn't submit my move right away!

Than you proceed to change your plan to fix what ever it is you over looked.

The "problem is" you have to do the same process in the moment!

In a Standard game you usually do not have a disconnection which means you will have to do the same processs in the moment!

It is a skill to be able to divorce yourself from a plan you currently think is good. When in fact it is a bad plan!

All I am saying is she should try and simulate the conditions the best she can.