blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess

You do realize, there is now software that can play your Chess.com blitz games for you. So, it's actually easier to cheat at blitz now because you don't even have to move the pieces.

No I I didn't know that at all.  Its ridiculous someone actually took the time to develop software to win chess games without even moving.  I should rephrase then and say its easier to cheat in correspondence and go undetected as opposed to cheating in blitz. 

Why is it people like to feel that correspondence chess is full of cheaters? I agree they exist. But what is this thing with thinking they are so prevelant that the entire system is ruined? Especially considering there are absolutely no stats on the subject.

I don't believe its full of cheaters. I simply just said its easier to cheat.  Stop reading into things that aren't there.

I have a huge gap between my correspondence chess and my blitz chess.  I can not even play bullet chess.  But think about that.  

Only players who are good enough to play bullet or blitz play bullet or blitz.  Accordingly the pool of players who play bullet and blitz chess is likely stronger than the pool who play coorespondence.  I think this explains the ratings difference.

I look at my coorespondence games and I see 1500 rated players making mistakes in a coorespondence game that 1400 blitz rated players would not make in a blitz game!

I recomend we use a computer evaluate the quality of games of say a 1500 coorespondence player playing coorespondence and 1500 blitz player playing blitz.  I think you will find the computer thinks the 1500 blitz play is better.  

Ok but then why the threads like this with so much butthurt?  I mean if you are rated 1800 in blitz you should easilly be rated 1800 in coorespondence here.  Unless you actually make worse moves when you have more time!  Is thinking dangerous to you?

As for the differences in my play I will occassionally look at an opening explorer.  But usually I don't.  I do however make use of the analysis board when I play.  I think that makes my games much better. (and improves my chess understanding)  I honestly don't understand how people can't play better chess in slower time controls than they do in fast time controls.  Its almost like they are not really thinking when they play chess.  For me that is the real mystery.  

I never said I would treat them like a beginner, but the facts are the facts.

If you take John Doe and Jane Doe.  John Doe has never playing anything but Internet Bullet and Internet Blitz, and he has a rating of 2000.  Jane Doe finds sitting in front of a computer screen an utter waste of time, and has only played over the board chess, and has a FIDE rating of 2000.

I guarantee you that if you had both of these people play 50 games against the same 50 experts or low masters, Jane would outscore John by a landslide!  It takes FAR more skill to achieve a 2000 FIDE rating than a 2000 ICC blitz rating.

Using an analysis board will make the quality of your chess higher because it is easier to see the best moves on an analysis board rather than having to use your visualisation skills. Whether this is an ethical thing to do is another matter? It may also not be the best way to improve.

repac3161 wrote:

Using an analysis board will make the quality of your chess higher because it is easier to see the best moves on an analysis board rather than having to use your visualisation skills. Whether this is an ethical thing to do is another matter? It may also not be the best way to improve.

I play CC as OTB without a clock for this reason. Using an analysis board hurts your calculation

I tend to doubt this.  Do you think using an analysis board hurts your calculation only if you use it during the game or do you think  it hurts your calculation even after the game?  It seems to me almost all players analyze some of their games with an analysis board when they are done.  Is this supposed to hurt their play as well?

repac3161

I didn't realize anyone would think using the analysis board was unethical. Does chess.com even post rules on this?  

I think using an analysis board deepens my understanding of the game. I don't use it all the time just because I don't always have time.  But in a tricky situation I will use it and definitely if I am going to post conditional moves.  

The posting of conditional moves seems to require the use of a sort of analysis board.  If you post a conditional move and as your looking at the position realize its not good, do you think its bad do you think its unethical to delete the conditional move?  

ThrillerFan hat geschrieben:

kleelof wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

All online ratings don't mean sh*t!

There are too many factors that alter online ratings that make them completely unreliable:

Connection issues - lose connection, lose the game, and it's all because of some drunk on the road in your neighborhood hitting a power pole with a blood/alcohol level of .15. Unrealistic clock scenarios - You have 1 minute left, I have 45 seconds, and it's a dead drawn Rook and Pawn versus Rook and Pawn, and you go around playing like a retarded jerk not accepting draws so you can race him out of time.  In any realistic game, the delay or increment, or for those with really old analog clocks, the insufficient losing chances rule, would result in a draw rather than a bullsh*t loss Attention Span - the vast majority of players that exclusively play internet blitz are those that literally have the attention span of a flea, or if they are lucky, maybe a 2-year old.  You've shown no chess skill what-so-ever by beating someone in a blitz game.  Try sitting there for 6 hours and grinding it out!  Then come see me and try to tell me you have skillz! Opponent Situation - I only play online Blitz if I am trying to wind down for the day, or have 10 minutes to kill with nothing to do and just looking to kill the time.  My 1756 blitz rating here means nothing at all.  You give me someone with an over the board rating of 1756 and this 2155 player will annihilate them 9 times out of every 10!  (And probably just plain beat them the 10th time)

All online ratings - bullet, blitz, bughouse, standard, correspondence, you name it, don't mean sh*t!

So, you're saying if you sat down to a board with someone with a Live Chess rating of 2000, and the player only played 30 and 45 minute games, you would play as if they were a beginner? Or at least someone who does not deserve a little respect OTB?

I never said I would treat them like a beginner, but the facts are the facts.

If you take John Doe and Jane Doe.  John Doe has never playing anything but Internet Bullet and Internet Blitz, and he has a rating of 2000.  Jane Doe finds sitting in front of a computer screen an utter waste of time, and has only played over the board chess, and has a FIDE rating of 2000.

I guarantee you that if you had both of these people play 50 games against the same 50 experts or low masters, Jane would outscore John by a landslide!  It takes FAR more skill to achieve a 2000 FIDE rating than a 2000 ICC blitz rating.

When it is so easy to reach 2000 on the internet, then why havent you reached it yet?

And also MOST players on this site who have a rating higher than 2000(like me), also play Otb(like me)! You can not just get a high blitz rating here without playing strong moves. Blitz is not luck, its chess skill combined with time pressure. Every good Otb player is at least a decent blitz player.

Till_98, Not all strong OTB players are decent Blitz players.  I spend a lot of time calculating, and often lose on time in Blitz in a won position.

nice logic bro, your pretty much saying any type of chess variant/time control is irrelevant. might as well say chess in general is irrelevant.

stop giving people excuses why they suck at blitz. it's 2014, everyone has a somewhat decent PC & internet connection. I would give you pity if this  was 2001 playing Blitz because of the shi**y internet connection, but not anymore.

In OTB chess in standard time, there is many other variables that affect gameplay. Mood, room temperature at the chess tourny, forgetting to bring a snack, noise from other competitors headphones, having to go to the restroom, smelly odor, etc.

Hear hear!

Would it matter if someone whooped you in the butt ?

Who was it that replied to the "nothing is real" claim by stubbing his toe on a rock and falling flat on his face, then shouting "Thus I refute it!"

That's funny. Because my calculations during live games has improved tremendously since beginning CC where I use an analysis board regularly. I think when people make this statement, they are forgetting that when you use an analysis board, you are actually able to learn to calculate deeper as you are able to learn by trial and error more.

John Lennon ! or Berkeley 

In "real life", you may not have two weeks to play a game, but you will likely have a good 2-5 hours. Not everyone has that much free time, to even play an hour or two hour game on their computer, so CC is a good solution. Would you play anyone in live chess if they took even 10 minutes for each move? Most likely not. So in CC, you can just move once a day and not sit at the computer waiting/being connected.

Samuel Johnson! That rings a bell... thanks Optimissed.

I think it helps tactics more than calculation because otb you can't see where the pieces are going when you calculate. There are all kinds of ridiculous endgame puzzles you can do if you want to work on calculation.