blueemu wrote:
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!"
John Lennon ! or Berkeley 
blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess
Sort:
niceforkinmove wrote:
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? ... 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. >>>
Somebody with a rating of maybe 1800 was explaining the other day that there's absolutely no need for three days because a good player will see the right move right away, so correspondence chess is [an anachronism, useless, whatever]
This attitude is probably widespread and it explains all you need to know. Surely we've all played the whizz kid otb who goes an hour up on the clock, applies tremendous pressure ... only to lose because Fred Bloggs works out a defence.
Somebody with a rating of maybe 1800 was explaining the other day that there's absolutely no need for three days because a good player will see the right move right away, so correspondence chess is [an anachronism, useless, whatever]
This attitude is probably widespread and it explains all you need to know. Surely we've all played the whizz kid otb who goes an hour up on the clock, applies tremendous pressure ... only to lose because Fred Bloggs works out a defence.
nobodyreally wrote:
blueemu wrote:
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!"
John Lennon ! or Berkeley >>>
I think it was a practical refutation by Samuel Johnson of Bishop Berkeley's solipsism. This would be the earlier Berkeley. He was promoted to the Later Berkeley when he became a bishop and decided that reality was really an idea not in his mind (the stuff of vicars) but in the mind of God. He didn't fall over ... he just kicked a rock.
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.
You're very welcome.
kleelof wrote:
AKAL1 wrote:
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
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.
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.
Tactics aren't calculations?
kleelof wrote:
Tactics aren't calculations?
Well yeah you always have to calculate but I think when you see the pieces moving you don't look as far as you would if you didn't move them. So you get the same kind of training you might get with shorter tactics puzzles.
But if you don't move the pieces you end up calculating farther ahead and I think this is better for improving at that.
There's some nice stuff here:
http://youtu.be/vvPcVwrZ4nI (1:29:59) Melborne Chess Club
http://youtu.be/tySL8qEVwhU (40:28) St. Louis Chess Club
I see what you are saying. But this sorta assumes that you are always moving the pieces and not visualizing.
I can't speak for other CC players, but I begin down a line of moves in my mind before I start moving anything. Moving the pieces are only to verify ideas. It does often reveal errors, but that is a + not a - as it teaches you to be aware of these errors. During a live game, you don't have time to consume and process these errors as you have to move forward in the game.
Regardless, and I know you were not the one to say this, but saying that CC chess criples or weakens your visualization skills is in accurate. It may not do as much to exercise them as live chess does, but there are many other things that are just as important to learn that CC is perfect for.
Anyway, one of the great things about chess; there are many different ways to learn and improve.
Bullet and blitz are more common just because people can play more games in the same span of time. The game quality is garbage compared to long games.
Hassenpfeffer
"blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess"
I agree. Wholeheartedly.
Fiveofswords wrote:
LuftWaffles wrote:
Are you ok there, Fiveofswords? Sounding a little depressed.
I get it though, if you detach yourself from all context and subjectivity and observe the universe from a totally objective point of view, nothing matters. The whole universe might as well not be there.
But even so, it could be argued you decided it was better to post that, than to not post it. Right?
yes i decided to post that. But what i decide means nothing. What i think is better means nothing. I might as well be a billiard ball in this cosmic dance that is fooled into thinking that it bounced off a wall because it wanted to. The only time my thoughts feel relevant at all is when i laugh at this game called relevance and long for the escape of nonexistence.
Its not depression. Depression requires that i care. The hindu and buddhists sought escape from samsara and you probably dont think thats motivated by depression, do you? honesty that isnt pink and fuzzy and feelgood is so taboo in this culture. Its comical. What are you so afraid of.
For someone who doesn't care and talks about some elemental meaninglessness of existence you come off as someone with a lot of baggage.
I used to be good at slow games and better at CC. I hated blitz because of the imperfections. I moved house and walked into the newly local chess club one evening and they were having their annual club championship which was a move every 10 seconds on the buzzer tournament. They asked me to play and I felt obliged to play, try, and had some luck and won it! They gave me the club trophy.
Mapping that onto online chess, I would have a poor rating at 5 minutes or less because my heart would not be in it. Doesn't mean I am using an engine.
Till_98 wrote:
puffpuff
Exactly.
I use the analysis board provided here, otherwise there's nothing to be gained from playing c.c. I find that use of the analysis board vastly aids my ability to formulate plans and combinations.