blitz to improve time management

Hello everyone

I am rated 1800 rapid on chess.com and lose half of my games due to time management. I find myself often struggling with managing time and when I have seconds on the clock my opponents have 5 mins

Would you advise playing blitz to improve time management and my blitz rating too?(I'm 1400)

I would highly appreciate if you tell me whether I should play blitz

@1

"lose half of my games due to time management." ++ Do you lose on time in won positions, lose on time in lost positions, or lose on the board with time left on your clock?

"when I have seconds on the clock my opponents have 5 mins"
++ And what is the position on the board? It is not your fault that your opponents play too fast. Can you convert a win or hold a draw with your seconds?

"Would you advise playing blitz" ++ No. I would advice to play with increment to put the focus back on the board where it belongs and not on the clock. Best is to play 15|10 rapid. That is the official time control like for the Rapid World Championship. Thanks to the increment you have 10 seconds per move to win a won position or draw a drawn position.

Lose on time in won positions and lose in equal positions

Thanks

@3

"Lose on time in won positions and lose in equal positions"
++ Then you need increment.

Do not listen to Puzzleslmaoz, he is only 1600 rapid.
'I play way too much blitz chess. It rots the brain just as surely as alcohol.' - GM Nigel Short
This was said by a 2594 rated grandmaster.

Sure. You are the guy who only played 1 blitz game (and then complained about in another topic).

What is the point of this insane trolling?

Nigel said this as a joke.

Obviously.

That is not correct, and is surely an exaggeration. Check this out:

This is your rapid. So you win 6.1% of games due to timeout, and you lose 2.2% of games. 2.2% is far below 50% of your losses.

As for blitz:

Here you win 15.6% of games due to timeout, and lose 7.5%.

Sure, here we will not see games where you were better but then was checkmated or resigned because of time management, but we will not see games where you were worse than won for the same reasons.

In any case, you win a lot more games due to time than you lose. It is probably the case where you lost one of your games due to time recently, and you have recency bias.

As for time management itself, in any case you have to adapt to a specific time control. If you play 3|0, you will adapt to that time control and if you then start playing 15|10, you will play it way too fast at the start, and then start to adapt to the new time control. Similarly, if you play 15|10 and then play 3|0, at first you will be too slow and then adapt to a new time control.

However you look at it whenever you change time control, there will be difficulties until you get used to time control.

Therefore, it all depends on what games would you like to play. If you wish to play 15|10, then your time management for that time control will be better by playing that time control, and if you want to play blitz, than your time management for that time control will be better if you play blitz.

If improvement is what you seek, longer games are better. Some people (and there are talented people like that) can improve on blitz alone, but most people will not.

Noone cares about the opinion of an ephemeral troll.

'Blitz chess kills your ideas' - Fischer
'Yes, I have played a blitz game once. It was on a train, in 1929.' - Botvinnik

Blitz is for fun, rapid is for improvement.

@23

"he can play rapid AND blitz at the same time"
++ So he loses blitz on time and loses rapid on the board.
He has difficulty to adapt to one time control. Playing two different time controls makes it worse.

If someone's calling others stupid, please report their comment.

We can't possibly review all comments from almost 170M members. **unless reported.

Appreciate your help.

The most likely explanation is that it's a joke. I like it.

Another explanation is that in the 1920's (when Botvinnik was a kid) the Leningrad Chess Club was quite poor, they probably didn't have enough chess clocks for the kids to play blitz with. So it's quite possible that the light games they played were not timed.

@27

"in the 1920's (when Botvinnik was a kid) "
++ In 1929 Botvinnik was 18 years old. The point is that by his own account he did not play blitz after that. Also in his Botvinnik School of Chess pupils were forbidden to play blitz.

nigel short can beat 30 people like you blindfolded even if he's 85 so please be respectful to a former world championship challenger

@32

https://www.chess.com/events/2023-fide-world-rapid-chess-championship/results

All of these are >2000 and they play rapid.
It is even real rapid 15|10, not pseudo blitz 10|0.

@34

Magnus Carlsen has played 195 rapid games here. More on other sites and other accounts.
https://www.chess.com/member/magnuscarlsen

The reason blitz is popular at higher levels is because it requires intuition +thinking classical/rapid is all just calculation /memorization which can get a bit boring plus you get more practice

A lot of players at a higher level also have overthinking issues so having low time forces them not to overthink as much rapid just makes them crumble (unless it is similar to classical)