I usually play 15|10 rapid, But when I play 3|2 I feel like I’m a super gm
Blitz games are better
Sort:
Dec 13, 2021
0
#43
CooloutAC wrote:
blueemu wrote:
I'll try once more, and then I'll decide that you're just trolling.
If you took a thousand very good chess players, started them all at 1200 rating, and had them play ONLY each other several hundred games, you would end up with a bell-curve distribution, centered on 1200 and tailing off into both higher and lower ratings.
If you took a thousand very bad chess players, started them all at 1200 rating, and had them play ONLY each other several hundred games, you would end up with a bell-curve distribution, centered on 1200 and tailing off into both higher and lower ratings.
The two rating distributions would look identical, even though one group of players is far stronger than the other group.
Ratings only have meaning WITHIN a group of players, not BETWEEN groups, and they depend only on win/loss, not on the quality of the moves.
So your claim that Rapid ratings are higher because "Rapid is easier than Blitz" is rubbish. Even if that were true, it couldn't have even the slightest effect on the Rapid vs Blitz ratings, because these are two seperate player pools and no rating points are exchanged between them.
Let me explain your contradiction in your ealier statement once again. Because everything you said was TLDR and irrelevenat to this point. You can't say rating has nothing to do with how well you play, while also saying W/L has nothing to do with how well you play. Trying to defending this ludicrous statement makes you the troll, not me buddy. I'm sincere in my arguments and trying to prove a point. You are simply desperate to try and prove me wrong. Thats the difference.
You’re stupid, you know that?
Blitz is fun but as danill stated about rapid you can be drunk, blind or whatever and still win and i think the same applies to blitz, especially bullet cause you just trust your gut and the rest will kind of come later. its a question wether they would be better than classical games considering they might be less accurate and include lots of blunders than the average normal rapid control but thats why i just play blitz cause i find it spicy and awesome 💕
Dec 13, 2021
0
#45
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
hello
Dec 13, 2021
0
#47
tcmarti wrote:
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
A high win rate just means you win more. If you win considerably more games than you lose, then your rating is on your way up. Back when I Was under 2000, my win rate was about 59%, and I Was consistently improving. When I got to 2000s, it leveled down to about 50%.
Without proof that your opponents are not cheating, you can be convinced that your accusations are correct. Sure. But without proof that your opponents are cheating, I likewise can be sure that your accusations are not correct.
Like I Said in an earlier post - even if we assume that most of them are cheating, and your report them, even if some are banned then others stay. Like trying to kill all the cockroaches. So why care? Because at the end of the day it makes no difference.
So since (1) saying they cheat makes you unhappy and doesn't ban them, and (2) saying they don't cheat makes you happy but also doesn't ban them, option 2 clearly is better.
Dec 13, 2021
0
#48
@B1ZMARK Your rating indicates you are a very talented player. On the surface I agree, an only 1100 player isn’t a very good cheater. However, one must take into consideration they don’t want to get caught. Perhaps they may not use an engine on every play. At your level, I have no idea how many mistakes or inaccuracies you make, probably not many. At my level (900-1000), I make 5-8 per game and many times at least 1 blunder. I always look at the analysis after each game and evaluate my play. The computer asks me to find the best play. Usually it takes me several tries to find that play. That’s why I (and my opponents) aren’t 2000+ players like you. I’m still very convinced at least a third of my opponents cheat. I’m not a sore loser and sure enough, many times I am correct as chess.com adjusts points. I still find it implausible a player can win 55-60 or sometimes 70% of their rapid games yet be much poorer blitz players, especially when they have 100’s of games at each time level. If you win that many games, you are constantly matched against higher rated players. And yes, I do suspect some of my blitz opponents are cheating. Somebody indicated only 4% of games are found to involve cheating. That’s only those who got caught. There’s no way to prove one way or the other but I’m still convinced a heckuva lot more than 4% of my opponents cheat.
Dec 13, 2021
0
#49
tcmarti wrote:
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
People get caught pretty easily though. Not cheating in every game will still get the person caught. Person who has to cheat to get to 1 100 level, have not even the basic chess understanding and will be very obvious. It is much more difficult to catch a titled player who cheats than a beginner.
The reason is because beginner knows so little about chess that he will not know which move is obvious and which is not. For instance, I played a game against the opponent who used the engine where I saw that my queen will be lost in a couple of moves. He found that instantly and then when he had to take the queen he hesitated and find a mate in 9 moves instead of taking the queen instantly and a checkmate in 12 for instance. He was so obvious that he was banned after 1 played game.
Along with that, lower level opponents will generally not know how to make it less obvious when they use the engine. I had another opponent who played very fast moves that needs to be calculated, and he found some other difficult moves, like backwards bishop move that aims to change the diagonals, which is difficult for 2 000 rated player to find at all, let alone in a few seconds, and when he got me pinned to the wall, instead of a logical move that 1 000 rated level player would find, he played something inaccurate and artificial in order to lower his accuracy, and be less obvious. But that move actually made it more obvious.
In general, 1 100 rated cheater (and a lot higher rated than that) doesn't have the skill required to be more refined when cheating and easily gets caught.
In short, you shouldn't be afraid of the cheaters. It will happen every once in a while, but it is not that bad, and blitz is probably not in any way cleaner than rapid.
For instance I generally play really long games 45|45 and 60|0, and I encounter a cheater perhaps every 20 games or every 30. If you aim to develop your game, you should probably play longer games (15|10 or longer).
Dec 13, 2021
0
#50
tcmarti wrote:
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
For a long time I always had a higher rapid win rate (it would go between 57%-61%) but my blitz rating would be much lower. When I was about 1500 rapid I was only 1100 in blitz and when I was 1700 Rapid I was only 1400 in blitz. So according to that I should be a cheater?
please subscribe to my channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPNVhUiTGEbT9sET8jPeYXQe subscribe to my channel
Dec 13, 2021
0
#52
CooloutAC wrote:
nklristic wrote:
tcmarti wrote:
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
People get caught pretty easily though. Not cheating in every game will still get the person caught. Person who has to cheat to get to 1 100 level, have not even the basic chess understanding and will be very obvious. It is much more difficult to catch a titled player who cheats than a beginner.
The reason is because beginner knows so little about chess that he will not know which move is obvious and which is not. For instance, I played a game against the opponent who used the engine where I saw that my queen will be lost in a couple of moves. He found that instantly and then when he had to take the queen he hesitated and find a mate in 9 moves instead of taking the queen instantly and a checkmate in 12 for instance. He was so obvious that he was banned after 1 played game.
Along with that, lower level opponents will generally not know how to make it less obvious when they use the engine. I had another opponent who played very fast moves that needs to be calculated, and he found some other difficult moves, like backwards bishop move that aims to change the diagonals, which is difficult for 2 000 rated player to find at all, let alone in a few seconds, and when he got me pinned to the wall, instead of a logical move that 1 000 rated level player would find, he played something inaccurate and artificial in order to lower his accuracy, and be less obvious. But that move actually made it more obvious.
In general, 1 100 rated cheater (and a lot higher rated than that) doesn't have the skill required to be more refined when cheating and easily gets caught.
In short, you shouldn't be afraid of the cheaters. It will happen every once in a while, but it is not that bad, and blitz is probably not in any way cleaner than rapid.
For instance I generally play really long games 45|45 and 60|0, and I encounter a cheater perhaps every 20 games or every 30. If you aim to develop your game, you should probably play longer games (15|10 or longer).
Problem is alot of people are always making new accounts or playing very few rated games and the system has to take that into consideration. There is no way to tell if they are honest or not.
In any case, people rated 1 100 (and somewhat higher) who get there by cheating (and those are people OP is talking about), can rarely escape the system for long.
I am sure that there are exceptions, but in general they are way too transparent to even intermediate players, let alone chess.com cheat detection, because they do not know the difference between a move that is very easy to play for a 1 100 rated player and a move that leads to it which is difficult to find on that level.
In many cases they mess up the first type of move because they want to look less suspicious and instantly find the second type, not realizing that this makes their play more suspicious because it seems more artificial, not less.
In any case, my point is that those who wish to improve will not be stopped by several engine users. Actually there are certain lessons that can be learned even from those crushing defeats, I've experienced it first hand. 
Fair play violations aren't common enough for you to use it as an excuse... I play rapid and don't have any issues. You are low rated and you are worried about engine users... just an excuse and waste of energy.
CooloutAC wrote:
MrLaoch wrote:
And bullet is more for the adrenaline... bullet games aren´t talented
Tell that to Nepo who literally said at the WCC he prefers playing bullet online. Bullet is the preferred game mode by Magnus online, Nihal and most super gm's. Its the hardest competition. And imo, the hardest to follow or play.
They didn't get to their level spamming bullet games... they got there spending thousands of hours playing and studying classical chess.
Dec 13, 2021
0
#55
CooloutAC wrote:
nklristic wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
nklristic wrote:
tcmarti wrote:
On the surface I agree, an 1100 player really has nothing to brag about or isn’t a very good cheater. But, they also don’t want to get caught. They may not use an engine on every play. Getting aid on 2-3 critical plays is enough. I contend a 900-1000 player such as myself make several mistakes or inaccurate plays per game, even a blunder or 2. If you disagree, please explain how a similar or slightly higher rated rapid player wins 55-60 or even 70% of their rapid games yet their blitz play is considerably rated less. Makes no sense. If you win that high a percentage, then you would continuously be playing higher rated players. Cheating on here is rampant. Without proof, I’m still convinced my accusations are correct.
People get caught pretty easily though. Not cheating in every game will still get the person caught. Person who has to cheat to get to 1 100 level, have not even the basic chess understanding and will be very obvious. It is much more difficult to catch a titled player who cheats than a beginner.
The reason is because beginner knows so little about chess that he will not know which move is obvious and which is not. For instance, I played a game against the opponent who used the engine where I saw that my queen will be lost in a couple of moves. He found that instantly and then when he had to take the queen he hesitated and find a mate in 9 moves instead of taking the queen instantly and a checkmate in 12 for instance. He was so obvious that he was banned after 1 played game.
Along with that, lower level opponents will generally not know how to make it less obvious when they use the engine. I had another opponent who played very fast moves that needs to be calculated, and he found some other difficult moves, like backwards bishop move that aims to change the diagonals, which is difficult for 2 000 rated player to find at all, let alone in a few seconds, and when he got me pinned to the wall, instead of a logical move that 1 000 rated level player would find, he played something inaccurate and artificial in order to lower his accuracy, and be less obvious. But that move actually made it more obvious.
In general, 1 100 rated cheater (and a lot higher rated than that) doesn't have the skill required to be more refined when cheating and easily gets caught.
In short, you shouldn't be afraid of the cheaters. It will happen every once in a while, but it is not that bad, and blitz is probably not in any way cleaner than rapid.
For instance I generally play really long games 45|45 and 60|0, and I encounter a cheater perhaps every 20 games or every 30. If you aim to develop your game, you should probably play longer games (15|10 or longer).
Problem is alot of people are always making new accounts or playing very few rated games and the system has to take that into consideration. There is no way to tell if they are honest or not.
In any case, people rated 1 100 (and somewhat higher) who get there by cheating (and those are people OP is talking about), can rarely escape the system for long.
I am sure that there are exceptions, but in general they are way too transparent to even intermediate players, let alone chess.com cheat detection, because they do not know the difference between a move that is very easy to play for a 1 100 rated player and a move that leads to it which is difficult to find on that level.
In many cases they mess up the first type of move because they want to look less suspicious and instantly find the second type, not realizing that this makes their play more suspicious because it seems more artificial, not less.
In any case, my point is that those who wish to improve will not be stopped by several engine users. Actually there are certain lessons that can be learned even from those crushing defeats, I've experienced it first hand.
The problem is there is no deterrent to stop them making new accounts. Its why this is a 15 year old site but its so rare to even see an account a year old let alone more then 2 months. Alot of people only cheat occassionally every now and then not everyone is going to be a just blatant gun ho cheater. And cheating comes in many forms besides just engine use. But unlike most modern websites in 2021 this site doesn't even use two factor authorization. But worst of all is that they sanction speedrunning as entertainment which encourages abuse and rating manipulation.
In any case, what you say here doesn't have anything to do with the point of not playing rapid pool, which is the point of OP's first post, which is: I don't want to play rapid because of cheaters.
It is not like an alt will play in rapid pool exclusively, and an alt will most likely affect various rating pools, so it is unimportant for this story. The fact remains that he can enjoy rapid pool the same amount he enjoys blitz.
Of course, if he dislikes rapid, that is another matter, I am just saying that one pool is not worse than the other because of cheating.
Dec 13, 2021
0
#56
CooloutAC wrote:
nTzT wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
MrLaoch wrote:
And bullet is more for the adrenaline... bullet games aren´t talented
Tell that to Nepo who literally said at the WCC he prefers playing bullet online. Bullet is the preferred game mode by Magnus online, Nihal and most super gm's. Its the hardest competition. And imo, the hardest to follow or play.
They didn't get to their level spamming bullet games... they got there spending thousands of hours playing and studying classical chess.
When you say studying classical chess. That is nonsense. They can study any chess game that played out including their own. And what you are saying is no different then saying they got there by studying period. Again, That doesn't mean playing classical chess, it means by your own admission that is not what they were doing. They were studying period which means reading, practice excercises and puzzles. Playing classical chess is not nescessary.
Do not discount what Magnus says:
Dec 13, 2021
0
#57
CooloutAC wrote:
nTzT wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
MrLaoch wrote:
And bullet is more for the adrenaline... bullet games aren´t talented
Tell that to Nepo who literally said at the WCC he prefers playing bullet online. Bullet is the preferred game mode by Magnus online, Nihal and most super gm's. Its the hardest competition. And imo, the hardest to follow or play.
They didn't get to their level spamming bullet games... they got there spending thousands of hours playing and studying classical chess.
When you say studying classical chess. That is nonsense. They can study any chess game that played out including their own. And what you are saying is no different then saying they got there by studying period. Again, That doesn't mean playing classical chess, it means by your own admission that is not what they were doing. They were studying period which means reading, practice excercises and puzzles. Playing classical chess is not nescessary.
All the players you cite HAVE indeed played many hundreds of classical games. They have long records you could look up if facts mattered to you. No one ever became a GM just playing bullet and blitz. These players obviously take classical seriously and respect FIDE in spite of its being a conspiracy run by washed-up oldsters trying to brainwash everyone else and keep the allegedly "more popular" forms of chess suppressed.
Dec 13, 2021
0
#58
CooloutAC wrote:
The fact they played lots of classical games doesn't mean its necessary when even according to you all they have to do is study them. And studying chess games doesn't mean they have to be classical they could be any games. They can even be bullet games. Or any games played exceptionally well as well as study mistakes in games. Noone ever became a GM playing bullet chess because it is not possible to do so even if they wanted to. Its not an option for the title. But ask any of these chess players including Magnus and Nepo and they would prefer to be playing bullet for sure. Well Magnus said at the press conference he thinks bullet without an increment is too fast for practical OTB play, But Nepo literally said he would be open to it and thats what he prefers online. Magnus himself, like most super gm's also prefers to play bullet online.
Please cite one post I ever made in any forum saying playing classical was NOT necessary if a person wishes to become a good chess player. I can't tell you how many times I have recommended playing classical because that's how you learn to think about chess and properly analyze positions. Your "according to you all they have to do is study" is an outright lie. Your endless falsification of other posters' meaning is apparently the only way you can think of to make your own points, as most of your conclusions are baseless babble.
The strawman troll is back in action, and again sad that the over 50 chess crowd isn’t dead yet because we are the ones holding back chess from popularity because we hate getting flagged and love lying to kids about chess.
Or something equally deranged.
Or something equally deranged.
I'll try once more, and then I'll decide that you're just trolling.
If you took a thousand very good chess players, started them all at 1200 rating, and had them play ONLY each other several hundred games, you would end up with a bell-curve distribution, centered on 1200 and tailing off into both higher and lower ratings.
If you took a thousand very bad chess players, started them all at 1200 rating, and had them play ONLY each other several hundred games, you would end up with a bell-curve distribution, centered on 1200 and tailing off into both higher and lower ratings.
The two rating distributions would look identical, even though one group of players is far stronger than the other group.
Ratings only have meaning WITHIN a group of players, not BETWEEN groups, and they depend only on win/loss, not on the quality of the moves.
So your claim that Rapid ratings are higher because "Rapid is easier than Blitz" is rubbish. Even if that were true, it couldn't have even the slightest effect on the Rapid vs Blitz ratings, because these are two seperate player pools and no rating points are exchanged between them.