I'm not really sure how many people use end game data bases and grandmaster games to play online correspondance chess. I guess some do, but I certainly can't be bothered putting that much time and effort into a game of online chess against some arbitrary opponent. I never even look up an opening, let alone anything more complex!
blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess
Sort:
I lost 200+ points in bullet chess over a bad days, but that's ok I guess since I am bout to play in a 7 day tournament starting saturday. Guys, some like to play fast controls, and some like only to play slow. I play both. Live with it. Instead of spending hours of discussing this we could play chess, or study, or whatever. There is more exciting things to discuss if you still want to discuss something.
Jul 2, 2015
0
#404
yureesystem wrote:
For me I prefer to play the player true strength not some games data base or opening manuel, where he or she can look up opening line and play like a grandmaster, or refer to endgame books and data base endgame: In correspondence games that is the problem, it is not cheating but it is real chess. If going to play corespondence games again it will be only 960 chess, there is no opening manuel to refer to or grandmasters game to get middlegame ideas,and I will be playing a player true strength. Blitz and bullet is probably the nearest to otb chess, but some players play for speed and not quality chess move and try to beat a player on how quick they can move the mouse; this is not good for chess improvement and can hurt you in the long run.
Yes, it is real chess. Maybe the realist chess available.
However, there's not much opportunity for research on endings. Tablebases are against the rules.
Jul 2, 2015
0
#405
Even without tablebases, there are plenty of excellent endgame encylopedias and books.
Jul 2, 2015
0
#406
Yes. And I have no qualms about using them despite it being a gray area. However, in more than 1000 correspondence games since the 1970s, the vast majority in the past eight years, I may have consulted Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual once for a game in progress. I have used the analysis board extensively in maybe half a dozen endings. In the past few months I remember a simple pawn race that looked superficially like a loss for me, but was in fact a technical draw. I used the analysis board every move to confirm that my king could get across the board fast enough to hold the draw.
Nov 29, 2016
0
#407
Optimissed wrote:
I more or less took five years out of otb play, just playing enough county games to maintain my grade (rating) at about 1950. I've just come back to otb chess this season and I've found that I'm sharper than I was and my otb analysis is probably far better, after just playing a few chess.com tournaments at 3 day chess. In my second game after the layoff I beat a 2000+ without trying too hard and I think the reason for that is that the 3-day game strengthens the habit of analysing everything. At my rating, the number of online cheats is extremely minimal. They do occur and it's possible to recognise them and then you find, a few months later, that they've been removed by chess.com, so think their cheat recognition algorithms aren't that bad. Actually there's an obvious method to tell if someone's cheating but I'm not going to say what it is. We should be able to work it out. Incidentally, I found far, far more cheats at 5 minute chess than at 3-day chess, which is why I use 10 minutes and not five as my Blitz standard. For those complaining that their rating is lower here than elsewhere, it's well known that 1800 here is stronger in general than 1800 elsewhere.
Why are we bringing threads that have been dead for almost a year and a half back to life? Especially a thread where the title and all of its contents are complete and utter horsesh*t anyway?
Anybody with half a brain knows that Internet Chess Ratings don't mean sh*t, not one iota!
- People cheat in Correspondence Chess - hence why I'm below 2100 there.
- Don't have the time to play Standard Chess here - I spend my spare time Over the Board - and if I did, I'd face cheaters because they'd use their time to check the old bot!
- Blitz Chess doesn't mean jack. It just shows that you can click your mouse faster. The games of 5-minute I have here are simply to kill time, and it's very rare that I play more than maybe 4 or 5 games at a time. It does happen, but it's extremely rare, because I make better use of my time studying books rather than playing stupid Blitz, which proves no skill at all.
- Bullet Chess is even worse. It's nothing more than a lag test.
The 1600 bullet rating I had at "that other chess site", the 1900 rating I have for 5-minute here, the 1880 that I have for over the board Quick Chess, and the 2000 or so Correspondence rating I have here, they all don't mean sh*t!
All that matters is your Over The Board, Regular Time Control rating. For me, that's 2110 currently, the only rating that counts!
ThrillerFan wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
I more or less took five years out of otb play, just playing enough county games to maintain my grade (rating) at about 1950. I've just come back to otb chess this season and I've found that I'm sharper than I was and my otb analysis is probably far better, after just playing a few chess.com tournaments at 3 day chess. In my second game after the layoff I beat a 2000+ without trying too hard and I think the reason for that is that the 3-day game strengthens the habit of analysing everything. At my rating, the number of online cheats is extremely minimal. They do occur and it's possible to recognise them and then you find, a few months later, that they've been removed by chess.com, so think their cheat recognition algorithms aren't that bad. Actually there's an obvious method to tell if someone's cheating but I'm not going to say what it is. We should be able to work it out. Incidentally, I found far, far more cheats at 5 minute chess than at 3-day chess, which is why I use 10 minutes and not five as my Blitz standard. For those complaining that their rating is lower here than elsewhere, it's well known that 1800 here is stronger in general than 1800 elsewhere.
Why are we bringing threads that have been dead for almost a year and a half back to life? Especially a thread where the title and all of its contents are complete and utter horsesh*t anyway?
Anybody with half a brain knows that Internet Chess Ratings don't mean sh*t, not one iota!
- People cheat in Correspondence Chess - hence why I'm below 2100 there.
- Don't have the time to play Standard Chess here - I spend my spare time Over the Board - and if I did, I'd face cheaters because they'd use their time to check the old bot!
- Blitz Chess doesn't mean jack. It just shows that you can click your mouse faster. The games of 5-minute I have here are simply to kill time, and it's very rare that I play more than maybe 4 or 5 games at a time. It does happen, but it's extremely rare, because I make better use of my time studying books rather than playing stupid Blitz, which proves no skill at all.
- Bullet Chess is even worse. It's nothing more than a lag test.
The 1600 bullet rating I had at "that other chess site", the 1900 rating I have for 5-minute here, the 1880 that I have for over the board Quick Chess, and the 2000 or so Correspondence rating I have here, they all don't mean sh*t!
All that matters is your Over The Board, Regular Time Control rating. For me, that's 2110 currently, the only rating that counts!
Why does your on the board rating count? Unless you are a titled player, your on the board rating is just as useless as the internet rating.
Nov 29, 2016
0
#409
The rating that counts is the rating that matters to you. None of them mean much to anyone else. I do generally agree with those who favour OTB, however. All ratings function best as personal markers: are you improving? My OTB over the past few years has revealed problems in my game, problems that may stem directly from stabilisation of my online blitz rating. I get away with a lot of junk in blitz. That junk hurts me in OTB.
"Why does your on the board rating count?"
Over the board means the most because you can be the most sure that your opponents are the most engaged and motivated in their games. They tend to involve over the board tournaments for money. Sitting in a playing hall is pretty different from playing in your room as if you were playing a video game. Finally, the time controls in OTB tend to be way longer than in online chess. Compare someone who's just casually saying "I'm just gonna play a few games online" to someone who is driving somewhere just to play in a tournament.
Jun 15, 2022
0
#411
Elubas wrote:
"Why does your on the board rating count?"
Over the board means the most because you can be the most sure that your opponents are the most engaged and motivated in their games. They tend to involve over the board tournaments for money. Sitting in a playing hall is pretty different from playing in your room as if you were playing a video game. Finally, the time controls in OTB tend to be way longer than in online chess. Compare someone who's just casually saying "I'm just gonna play a few games online" to someone who is driving somewhere just to play in a tournament.
OTB is honest, <that program I won't name> isn't making moves 80% of the time.
Martin_Stahl wrote:
Erik_29 wrote:
It depends on how sneaky the cheater is. Some will make a bunch of engine moves in a row and analyzing the game with an engine will reveal them. The smart cheats only make enough engine moves to win, like in critical situations. Then it's almost impossible to tell, did they see that tactic or did they have help????? You'll never know.
If someone is good enough to know when to use an engine and then disciplined enough to only rarely use it, then you are correct, it is almost impossible tell. How many people, that are willing to cheat, are that good to fit both of those?
Having a string of moves match an engine isn't that big of a red-flag; I've had it happen in OTB casual and tourney games. Some positons are easier to play. It is when they statstically play moves that correlate well with engines over a large number of moves, over multiple games that will really point out a cheater (there are probably other ways too).
Dec 4, 2022
0
#413
Nemo96 wrote:
I've seen a 2100 correspondence and 1200 bullet. And the low bullet rating came from 800 games.
Some of us are past 65 years of age, low on energy and with failing eyesight. Blitz and Bullet become nearly impossible at that age, while Correspondence is only slightly handicapped.
Online chess doesn't matter
Dec 4, 2022
0
#416
blueemu wrote:
Nemo96 wrote:
I've seen a 2100 correspondence and 1200 bullet. And the low bullet rating came from 800 games.
Some of us are past 65 years of age, low on energy and with failing eyesight. Blitz and Bullet become nearly impossible at that age, while Correspondence is only slightly handicapped.
Speed extends your youth.
Dec 4, 2022
0
#417
[from my point of view]
a : Bullet (1m) it's for training and personally I don't find it very funny and [in my opinion] it would never occur to anyone to play against bots in 1m which confirms me in the idea that it is a bad idea to specialize in 1m.
b : Rapide (10, 15 or 20 m) it's for learning and in fact in the same idea I think that is more profitable to play against ourselves or against a bot set on a sufficient level but with the handicap that the artificial intelligence has to play in bullet while we have all our time (the huge advantage is that we don't waste our time waiting for our opponent to play and the artificial intelligence is theoretically able to calculate 3 million positions per second which makes it potentially efficient even in bullet )
c : Blitz (3 or 5m) for me this is the real game where we have fun. If we play with pre-moves it is rather 3m and if we play without pre-moves it is rather 5m (against players on a chessboard there are no pre-moves and on chess programs there are no pre-moves either, so for example I try to play without pre-moves to avoid bad habits).
3m+2s it is also a successful time because the world championships called blitz take place in this time but personally I think it changes the game too much for it to be really considered as blitz, for example if you play this position against a very strong chess program in 3m :
there is a good probability that you won't be able to win whereas if it's in 3m+2s you increase enormously your probabilities to win (which emphasizes that it changes too much the game for 3m+2s to be really considered as 3 or 5 m blitz).
On Youtube we can find lots of videos of banter blitz with a GM playing against players who can be not IM or GMI but can be against lot of players above 2000 and they win almost all the time and with superior, good or winning positions (so it's not really a lottery and it's really possible to develop strenght or level ).
And otherwise yes I think or I hope that Blitz is respected but it is not necessarily taken seriously. We can win more easily but lose more easily too (so be careful with the illusion of artificial progression and if we lose games that doesn't mean we are necessarily regressing).
Dec 4, 2022
0
#418
Kasporov_Jr wrote:
I'm tired of people bragging about having '' high '' correspondence chess ratings, yet see thier blitz rating be a measily 1200. Having a 1800+ bullet/blitz rating is more respectable than being a 2000 in Correspondence chess
I'm rating 1850 uscf rating in chess, and my bullet/blitz rating accurately describes it. Correspondence chess is extremely unrealistically long, what tournament in the world will you have more than 2 weeks for a game? If your good at chess, the moves will come to you quick, you dont need 24 hours to analyze.
and it's so easy to cheat in correspodence chess every once in a while, you can look at a chess engince for a couple of moves & it will go unnoticed. But you dont have time to fool around with blitz/bullet.
I suck in daily.
10 min rapid takes way to long so ppl can cheat and when they resigen its like 18 minutes of wasted time but in blitz I cant even talk in chat without worrying about my opponent next move. i have moved to bullet yet because I'm not at that level yet but even if they quit its 4 mins of wasted time.
For me I prefer to play the player true strength not some games data base or opening manuel, where he or she can look up opening line and play like a grandmaster, or refer to endgame books and data base endgame: In correspondence games that is the problem, it is not cheating but is it real chess? If I going to play corespondence games again it will be only 960 chess, there is no opening manuel to refer to or grandmasters game to get middlegame ideas,and I will be playing a player true strength. Blitz and bullet is probably the nearest to otb chess, but some players play for speed and not quality chess move and try to beat a player on how quick they can move the mouse; this is not good for chess improvement and can hurt you in the long run.