When you blunder pieces in Blitz it is simply your own fault. My blitz rating also describes m otb rating and in my opinion every good otb player is at least a decent blitz player. I mean I might have the worst internet connection on this site and I am speaking to other people and listening to music during the games and its really not hard to play good intuitonal moves without blundering pieces.
blitz/bullet rating is the only thing that matters in internet chess
Sort:
Well guys I found this chart to be quite accurate.
http://www.chess.com/article/view/chesscom-rating-comparisons
When your correspondence rating is 400+ pts higher than Blitz rating, then something is wrong lol. I think a good Blitz player IS a good chess player but at the end of the day Online ratings don't mean anything. Would you write in your resume that you have 2000 correspondence rating or 2000 Blitz in chess.com?
Oraoradeki wrote:
Well guys I found this chart to be quite accurate.
http://www.chess.com/article/view/chesscom-rating-comparisons
When your correspondence rating is 400+ pts higher than Blitz rating, then something is wrong lol. I think a good Blitz player IS a good chess player but at the end of the day Online ratings don't mean anything. Would you write in your resume that you have 2000 correspondence rating or 2000 Blitz in chess.com?
Niether one since they both mean crap in the real world.
I like playing blitz otb. Definitely not on Chess.com.
(no offence)
I used to like playing live chess, but too many connection issues forced me ta stop playing that form indefinitely.
Alas, I don't think any rating should have that much prominence in forums. I figure it's the substance of the poster (and not his respective ratings).
Unfortunately many have little substance other than their inflated ego.
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.
lol, everyone knows that any online game like chess and the Street Fighter series is just for fun. The wins/losses and ratings in those types of games should not be taken seriously, period, end of story, thread closed...
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 think they are just ratings. In honesty there is no need to boast about them they go up and down depending on the level of honest playing.
This is just computer playing and in all play I expect my opponent is been honest. I have seen my ratings go down to nearly nothing but the more one plays and studies it has to be said more confidence is gained.
I like chess.com. To my knowledge there is no chess club where I live and I have never played accross the board chess. I learned the rules of chess from a "Beginners Chess" book over 50 yrs ago and never had a chance to play until I discovered chess.com recently. Some might think playing on the computer is not perfect. And I agree, but it is better and more effective then nothing.
In an ordinary friendly game without putting an over emphasis on time is there an average time one should take between moves. Also what is the longest time one can officially have to make a move? Please and thanks.
For all the people who play Over the Board Chess and Computer Chess I should think it all comes down to having a quality opponent. For me I would choose OTB above the computer but there lies the issue - I feel one will fall back to the computer - as to find an opponent who will readily play at this level would be a rare find.
If one cheats it is a move against themselves.
Take the time control in some tournaments, though. 90|30+60min at move 40. The point of that time? To evaluate positions thoroughly and to play the best moves. In bullet? Look, instinct, play. And the result? You fall into a trap. And then your opponent loses on time. What's the point in playing a match that you won't finish because of some issue on time?
Optimissed wrote:
The idea that a move will "come quick" to a good player is just stupid and ignorant. The idea of c.c. is to find good moves.
I think, if a blitz player has a strong slow play skill, they can find good moves during a blitz game. I mean, they must or there would not be 1900+ rated blitz players.
However, I doubt they regularly find the strongest move, which is something condusive to CC play. One of the many reasons I prefer it.
yeah and speaking of finding the best move, alot of those Blitz players have a surprisingly low tactics rating (excluding the ones who only done like 10 problems etc).
Optimissed wrote:
I don't think there's usually such a thing as the strongest move. Therefore one looks for good moves and tries to choose the one that suits one's style.
What do you mean when you say there is not usually a strongest move? Masters games are full of them. Any chess engine can determine a strongest move in most non-endgame positions.
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 would rather play a correspondence game than a blitz or bullet. You actually learn more. Relax. If I wanted to play serious chess, I would do it OTB anyways. Most if it is just for fun. Yes, for fun. Then comes along someone like you ranting about nothing.
I play it all. Otb-tournaments in longchess and rapid, Online3-days, blitz and rapid, but not bullet.
I want to be good at Otb-longchess, and all the rest are training and fun building strenght for Otb.
3-days is a fine way to learn openings, think, and develop my game. Onlineblitz is good exercise, good for openings and testing.
The rating is a feedback i look at. It is a graph that describes progress and stagnation. I am stretching for more rating, and it encourages me to look at videos and books, and take classes. I am proud of that I was able to gain rating, and most I gained in correpondence, because its there I spent most time.
I think Grey Goose wrote well.
Too me bulletrating is not existing, and blitzrating means less than onlinerating because i play less blitz.
Till_98 wrote:
When you blunder pieces in Blitz it is simply your own fault. My blitz rating also describes m otb rating and in my opinion every good otb player is at least a decent blitz player. I mean I might have the worst internet connection on this site and I am speaking to other people and listening to music during the games and its really not hard to play good intuitonal moves without blundering pieces.
I am an expert rated 2011 USCF and my highest was at 2110 USCF, my friend who is an expert and rating is at 2160 and strong attacker, his blitz rating suck but his correspondence chess is 2300. Some player move fast amd others need more time to make quality moves. For example the blitz (3 minute blitz) Kasporov 1860 and Jayjude 2011, this player rated 2011 drop a pawn on move 8.g4?, I mean no expert would played this move in the Hyper- Accelerated Dragon, it just drop a pawn for nothing, that is sloppy chess. I also noticed players who are USCF & FIDE experts and masters with low blitz rating, that does not make them any less of a player in strength, I sure their otb rating strength real.
I like to add I have another expert friend who bullet rating is 2400 but his otb rating sucks at 2016 USCF and that is his highest otb rating. Can you seriously consider him a strong player because his bullet rating is 2400? He is no master, just an low rated expert.
probably because of the inability to cheat.
Aug 13, 2014
0
#137
No bullet really doesnt count, bullet is no chess. When you have a bad connection even Magnus would lose all his bullet games. But Blitz(5min or 3+2) is something completly different. Even in big tournaments the winner will be decided with a blitz game when it is tiebreak. There is even an official Fide rating about blitz. The big point is that online chess in general isnt taken as seriously as Otb of course and that might be the reason why some players often dont care about winning the game and some players really try to win. Of course 8.g4 is a beginner move but maybe he simply didnt care about winning at this moment, maybe he just wanted to have fun and play some crazy stuff. You can never know.
And you were wrong with your argumentation about titled players here. I looked at the statistics of all players on this site and there were only very very very few titled players who had a much worse blitz rating than their Fide rating. 95% of all titled players here are very strong and above average blitz players on chess.com. There blitz rating describes their Fide rating. I only know few exceptions like IM Pfren...
There is a big difference in blitz and correspondence chess, blitz a player depends on instinct, intuition and impulse, not much calculation or none at all but correspondence chess is more like otb chess, you can make the best move analyze the best alternatives and you don't lose a won position because of player who can move the mouse quicker.
Here is a endgame I played in another chess site and if it was playing blitz I would lost but it was correspondence. :)
If this endgame was a blitz, I would of lost and not learn how draw this game, because I had time to analyze I could find the drawing line.
I just noticed a slight mistake 2...g4 3.Kd2 Kf3 4.Nxa3 g3 5.Nc2 g2 instead of 6.Nd4 a better move is 6.Ne1+ Kf2 7.Nxg2 quicker draw.
Till_98 Wrote:
No bullet really doesnt count, bullet is no chess. When you have a bad connection even Magnus would lose all his bullet games. But Blitz(5min or 3+2) is something completly different. Even in big tournaments the winner will be decided with a blitz game when it is tiebreak. There is even an official Fide rating about blitz. The big point is that online chess in general isnt taken as seriously as Otb of course and that might be the reason why some players often dont care about winning the game and some players really try to win. Of course 8.g4 is a beginner move but maybe he simply didnt care about winning at this moment, maybe he just wanted to have fun and play some crazy stuff. You can never know.
And you were wrong with your argumentation about titled players here. I looked at the statistics of all players on this site and there were only very very very few titled players who had a much worse blitz rating than their Fide rating. 95% of all titled players here are very strong and above average blitz players on chess.com. There blitz rating describes their Fide rating. I only know few exceptions like IM Pfren...
I agree with you that blitz is essential, especially in otb tournament, when a blitz can decide who is first place. But otb blitz is much different than online blitz, otb blitz is a truer to a blitz strength. I player play trash opening to win on time but the otb blitz player play standard opening, serious chess. I also not referring to title player like IMs and GMs, more to low rated master, some them have a 1800 blitz rating, that doesn't mean they are 1800 otb player, they don't move fast and suck at blitz.
I more concern with my quality of my moves, and working on my blitz. I glad you are able to play blitz at your otb rating, that is very commendable.
I also using online chess to improve my skills, I like quality chess if my opponent makes a mistake in the opening I need a enough time to calculate, so I can punish that player for their bad move.
Jadulla wrote:
Blitz is way to intense for me. If I want adrenaline rush and sweaty armpits I'd rather play a round of Battlefield or something
I just play for fun blitz or bullet.