I have played 10 min rapid from 500 to 1400 but after this level players were getting tough so I decided to take 10/5 min challenge. So i think yes if player has a rating of 1400 in Blitz he could beat a 1400 in rapid as he calculation are of the level but fast as compared to rapid 1400 and same goes for bullet
Are 10min rapid players better than 30 mins rapid players
Sort:
I feel like 10 min is better than other rapid time controls because it gives you enough time to think while also giving you enough time pressure that's good practice for blitz and bullet, which will be your main time controls when you are higher rated
Jan 18, 2025
0
#5
Congrats on hitting 1400! That’s a big milestone and definitely something to be proud of.
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
Jan 18, 2025
0
#6
CornishOgre wrote:
Congrats on hitting 1400! That’s a big milestone and definitely something to be proud of.
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
+1
O-O wrote:
CornishOgre wrote:
Congrats on hitting 1400! That’s a big milestone and definitely something to be proud of.
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
As for your question, I think it’s less about whether you’re “only good because you play 30-minute games” and more about the difference in the player pools across time controls. From what I’ve seen, 10-minute rapid is one of the more popular time controls on Chess.com, so I think it naturally attracts a larger and often stronger pool of players. With more people playing, there’s more competition, and the skill level at each rating can feel higher compared to less common time controls like 30-minute games.
I wouldn’t worry too much about comparisons between time controls. The fact that you’re improving and enjoying the process speaks for itself. I’d love to have your ratings!
+1
+2*
Hi everyone,
I recently crossed 1400 after about 10 months of playing on Chess.com. Before that, I used to play casually with friends. I was decent at chess but didn’t know much about tactics, openings, or theory in general. However, I could calculate moves well and occasionally beat strong players.
When I started playing on Chess.com, I dove into online chess content like GothamChess and ChessVibes, and I even bought Levy's book. This helped me improve significantly in tactics, openings, and developing a foundational understanding of chess theory.
That said, my biggest challenge is fast chess. I struggle with anything below 15 minutes. While I feel proud of my 1400 rating and believe I’ve earned it, I can’t help but wonder:
Am I only good because I play 30-minute games?
Are players at my rating who play 10-minute rapid actually better than me?
I’d love to hear your thoughts and advice on this!