I think blitz Is good but, bullet is too much.
blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess
Sort:
Chesscoaching wrote:
I don't see how being better at fast chess than at slow chess is anything other than focus on impulsive moves.
...and I don't see how bumping a 6 month old thread serves any purpose...
If it managed 23 posts in a day it was obviously a good topic.
Feb 24, 2015
0
#225
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
Till_98 írta:
pearsnow wrote:
Coz being able to think fast is bad obviously
Seriously?
Sarcasmly.
Thats what I hope, too, but you never know...
Feb 24, 2015
0
#226
I really really suck at blitz - Its all I played when I first started here a couple months ago. But I noticed I can actually win playing turn-based, and looking at my opponents' blitz ratings, I noticed also that they we much MUCH higher than my blitz ratings..
Then I started to play live standard (i only have time maybe once/week for this) and now that rating is climbing with every game right now, and I also find that my losing opponents' blitz ratings are much much higher than mine.
My conclusion from this is that when I think about strategy/position and take the time to be attentive, I'm better than alot of players who beat me very easily in blitz. I don't know about other people, but that's meaningful to me - and I think that my live standard or turnbased ratings would be more reflective of my OTB (standard time - not blitz).
Chesscoaching wrote:
If it managed 23 posts in a day it was obviously a good topic.
Quantity of posts has nothing to do with being a good topic...in fact, many of the worst topics ever are dozens of pages. The OP is actually responsible for several under both Kasporov_jr and SexySunshine sockpuppet accounts...
@Till_98, I agree to a point about blitz, some otb tournament first place is decicded on a blitz game. One reason for a strong player who is weak in blitz to get better at it. Personal, I been working on this with a lot tactical training and let see if this works for me to get at least to 2000 in bullet and blitz. I see already an improvement in tactical trainer and my goal is at 2200 in tactical trainer this summer.
Thank you Till_98
all of these online ratings are just useless, FIDE is king
Till_98 wrote:
Elubas wrote:
With blitz there are just too many variables. Sure I wouldn't expect a 2200 blitz player to be a 1400 fide player, but could they be a 1700-1800 fide player if they just so happen to be good at blitz? Sure. If they devoted enough time to blitz and all its tactics, sure.
Sorry, but I dont believe this is possible.
You don't have to apologize for having an opinion. But I do believe it's possible, given that I've seen it.
Feb 24, 2015
0
#233
This would be more than just strange. I mean of course time is a factor in blitz chess but you need to play strong moves to win a game anyway. Its not that you dont need any understanding of chess and its just tactics that make you win a game. At least not at higher levels.
Canadian_Expert wrote:
KirbyCake wrote:
all of these online ratings are just useless, FIDE is king
Interesting statement from a guy who is too weak to even have a FIDE rating, lol.
what exactly are you smoking, all you have to do is play in enough FIDE tournaments to get a FIDE rating?
Canadian_Expert wrote:
I don't smoke. But apparently you do, and it's crack. After 180 bullet games, you're just BARELY over 2000. Can you say: low IQ anyone?
most of them are against friends that i don't really want to play a long game against them since they take too long to make bad moves anyways.
but apparently you're so bad you don't even have a FIDE rating, too sad. get better noob.
Canadian_Expert wrote:
Yeah right. It's hillarous watching a simpleton try to rationalize away losses.
I'm at least 400 elo stronger than you are in slow chess, little fella. I've only been here a week and already my bullet rating is 2150. I'll easily get it over 2200.
You're just a stupid kid with no rating at all. Big mouth, and tiny brain. That's why after 180 games, you're still just barely over 2000, lol.
oh, so you don't have a FIDE rating because you are shit at slow chess?
cause that's what you are essentially saying, chances are even though i haven't played in 5 years i could easily destroy you in a slow game.
Feb 24, 2015
0
#237
The truth is. I find that my play is better when I am using a board. When online you tend to miss out on somethings. However, ona board I have complete comfidence.
Canadian_Expert wrote:
I never said I don't have a FIDE rating, idiot. It's YOU who doesn't have a FIDE rating. I'm much stronger than you are in every time control at chess....slow, rapid, blitz, or bullet. After a full 180 games you still have a paltry weak bullet rating as PROOF of what i'm saying.
You're just a stupid kid with nothing but empty words. Matches your empty skull!
it seems you don't even have a FIDE card because you are just shit at slow chess.
you want to play vs me in bullet? unless all you can do is shit talk when you're probably a kid with 1800 USCF
you probably play so few games because you know you are overrated as fuck
@canadian expert
don't just criticize anyone because, they're bad at bullet. bullet just takes place for 1 minute, it's not a reasonable game of chess. most of the persons just make a move fast and save time. I personally am using a laptop and it's hard to move the pieces at bullet. so, don't go juding and critcizing others without getting your facts straight. bullet is just a dirty play, I find blitz reasonablr though.
Feb 25, 2015
0
#240
ssakash wrote:
@canadian expert
don't just criticize anyone because, they're bad at bullet. bullet just takes place for 1 minute, it's not a reasonable game of chess. most of the persons just make a move fast and save time. I personally am using a laptop and it's hard to move the pieces at bullet. so, don't go juding and critcizing others without getting your facts straight. bullet is just a dirty play, I find blitz reasonablr though.
Bad at bullet??? One is rated 2000 (!) and the other big mouth is rated 2100 and they are accusing each other of not being able to play chess. It is just hilarious to watch the 2 monkeys brag over who has the biggest c**ck.
"I liken blitz chess to talking fast. If you can talk and argue fast and sound good, that may mean something. However I would rather have a slow debate, where people take their time to come up with good arguments one way or another. Basically some people's idea of arguing is about "sounding good", replying fast and being in the person's face a bit."
Very well put.
Thanks, I find your posts high quality also.