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

Till_98, I hope this answer your question, if the knight can get in front the pawn even without the king help, white can draw. I use online chess to improve my skill, epsecially my calculating ability, I know if it was blitz game, I would of lost and probably not analyze the endgame. I have much respect for you and I know how hard it is become an expert.

Ah yes of course. I missed that whites knight can get in front of the pawn in time so he doesnt need the king. Very instructive game, thanks

Chess_is_my_god, do you say that because your blitz rating is 1300?

Blitz is useful I think.  Both to test openings and little patterns you can pick up that help speed up your analysis in long games.  Even simple stuff like a bishop on c2 covers all of a c5 knight's forward squares or maybe it's a mate-attacking pattern you hadn't seen.

Sure you can learn this in analysis of long games, but blitz is fast paced and fun.  You more or less play what comes to mind first and test your intuition about a position.

Wishing Kasporov_Jr the ability to become a Grand Master at Chess.

I empathise; and can only work it out by trying to differentiate between bullet/blitz chess; correspondence chess and over the board chess. This is all just my personal thoughts on chess in general.

COMPUTER CHESS

Bullet/blitz is for fun and allows for mistakes that one might not ordinarily make and maybe is not taken as serious as a slower game. Is Kasparov_Jr saying that this type of chess should be given a higher status in its own right. ? (Perhaps this is already the case and if so - Cool)

Correspondence Chess played on the Computer is the next best type of Chess the Computer can offer to compete with OTB Chess. The players set the time limit for moves

say it might be 3/days ..........Maybe it might take 3/days for a player to work out where the game is going for him/her. I feel those long time paramaters are for players that like Chess but might have to leave a game on hold for some reason or another. It is noted there is a wide choice here on chess.com when one makes a choice for time paramaters. Kasparov_Jr makes the point that if one is good at chess the moves will come to you quick and it shouldn't take along time to analyse. I agree and this site makes allowances for that by offering a wide choice. It is up to the players to decide.

Perhaps it might be a good idea for chess.com to offer the choice to the players if they wish to have the game recorded for ratings. (this is just a bullet/blitz thought right now and could be open for debate maybe on another blog).

Kasporov_Jr makes the point that Computer Chess is open to fraud. This is a point well made and backed up on this blog. In all probability it does foolishly happen. If I could write a programme to cheat at computer chess I should be well advised to turn my energy and time into using this tallent in a more legit and profit making way. If one thinks there is cheating going on, then at the end of the day you are really playing a computer programme. I honestly think the number of players on chess.com that might cheat are small – what would be the point?

OVER THE BOARD CHESS

This is all of the above with the added advantage it is as real as it gets. There is human interaction and maybe some banter. It's got a live atmosphere and if one is in a tournament one can feed of the energy and so on. Above all one is in more controle of the rules.

To sum up. I feel chess is a wonderful and challenging game that can be played at many levels and the higher the level achieved it will be more difficult to get decent competition. An above average memory is a bonus and if one has a photographic memory better still. Above all have patience and be a good looser as invariably there will always be someone better. It is all about choices. The Computer Chess I feel will never offer the same excitement as OTB but as a training tool it is excellent.

Sorry just one other thing.

RATINGS

I love the ratings, and the computer dishes them out to you for winning and loosing. For beginners they are wonderful and give confidence to keep trying and improving. Also not to be taken too seriously. Respect the opponent no matter what the rating. I also feel the ratings are a good indicator (no matter what one might feel about them) if one offers a challenge.   A player with a higher rating might not wish to come down to the level of a lower rating. I have had it here that a player would not take on a challenge because my rating was too low. I think this is an option on chess.com and not to be taken as a personal rejection.

I think I have gone off on one, I am going to post it now that I have gone to the bother of writing it.

Take care guys and happy chess. In whatever format.

Indeed. What is lost to most pundits with CC vs Blitz/ Bullet play, is that while fastplayers can rack up (or lose points) playing opponents at an fast clip..."hit it n quit it"....CC players face multiple players at one time. ALL OF THEM GUNNING FOR YOU with the time, resources (possibly engines) at their disposal. Yeah, an high Blitz/Bullet rating is impressive. It's just ta me, having to face 50 opponents simultaneously and winning an modest 51% is more qualitative and more indicative of an substansive posters. Personal opinion, guys. Thanx.

Strong players actually use strategy even in speed games... that's why getting a 2000 rating isn't as easy as just "moving fast with pointless moves" as every person a million rating points and years away from 2000 likes to say.

Carlsen is the world champ at every time control: classical, rapid, and blitz... it just so happens the best speed players are also strong grandmasters.  AFAIK there is no such thing as world bullet champion.

• shell_knight wrote:

  Chess_is_my_God wrote:

  
  

  Blitz / Bullet all Tactics and no strategy , only time wasting and stalling tactics. so hes got a 2000+ rating ..but gets destroyed anything longer than 5 mins, what a joke.

  Chess Club , im talking real chess club, not online, im talking walking into a place and playing somebody.

  blitz is for children, the youngsters, get them in the mood.

  Who is the world number one blitz/bullet champion ???

  nobody cares:)

  My personal opinion

   

  Strong players actually use strategy even in speed games... that's why getting a 2000 rating isn't as easy as just "moving fast with pointless moves" as every person a million rating points and years away from 2000 likes to say.

  Carlsen is the world champ at every time control: classical, rapid, and blitz... it just so happens the best speed players are also strong grandmasters. AFAIK there is no such thing as world bullet champion.

 Disagree with you, it is base on who can move quicker the mouse  and blunders, I seen 2000 online blitz player blunder pieces and pawns and make horrible positional mistakes. It about cheap tactics and being quicker so not to allow your opponent to think. FM, IM and GM, I will agree with you, their skill level is high. 

Well, you can't disagree the best players are also the best speed players.

But anyway, yes, there are plenty of cheap tricks and blunders, but if it were just about moving quickly people could increase their rating by doing the same.

So prove it, move fast and play for tricks.  I bet your rating will even go down

You can also see strong players give very good endgame technique and maneuvering in these fast games.  Something weaker players can't even manage in tournament games.

I prefer tournament chess for sure (you seem to play more blitz here than I do) but being a good speed player is about understanding the game.  You only have time to play what you know really really well.  If it were just about playing fast, then even you could be 2000+.  Feel free to prove me wrong and increase your rating a few hundred points before the next post

My last blitz session I was a little drunk and played as fast and loose as I could (some really terrible games objectively) and IIRC I gained 3 ratings points (lost a lot, then quit the moment I was ahead heh).

no rating is more inflated than the online chess rating on this site. Some players are proud being 1800 online chess but they mostly are 1200 Otb and their blitz rating is also around 1200 normally. Of course blitz is not the world but there is a reason why strong Otb players are also strong blitz players. Its not about moving simply fast, its about playing good moves with few time. you can try Whatever you want, playing fast and playing for tricks wont help you. In blitz the difference between 2 players strength is the Intuition. People with a very good intuition will often find the best moves without taking time for the move and they will often see if a tactic is working without even calculating it properly. And this intuition comes from the experience of a ches player and of his general chess knowledge. People like Kramnik have such an immense experience in chess that their Intuition is also very good. Chess is not luck and also blitz is not luck,its all a matter of skill.

Till, my online rating is deflated by 200 points to my USCF. My FIDE is brand-new, so I don't use it as comparision (it is 1820 even though I have not played many FIDE rated games)

Simple fact is I can't concentrate as well on a computer screen

I have such a wide variety of ratings on different sites trying to correlate them is a joke.  I'm 16xx USCF, 1700 on lichess, 2000+ on fics (standard), 2000+ on chesscube, and like 1200 blitz here and like 1100 bullet here (of course, very small sample size here--I just don't like the interface at all and don't take it very seriously when I play here).

To me, trying to say one rating matters more than another is just foolish.  It's all about how seriously you and your opponents take a certain type of game in a certain place.  

No no no, my blitz games (and those around my level, 1700) are pretty terrible in terms of the kinds of blunders there are.  My last game I was just laughing at myself... I feel like it was uncharacteristically bad.

But there are good games too where there is actually decent technique, solid plans, and no big tactical blunders.  I and most my opponents understand pawn structures for example, and our moves will follow (at least superficially) strategically sound plans.  We know which endgames to avoid and play our minor pieces and heavy pieces accordingly.  And even when I've been drinking a bit, and I feel like I don't care about my moves, I still have a basic plan for every move I make.

I played a series with a ~1500 opponent who kept giving me an obvious strategic target like a backward pawn on a half open file, or he'd have a very bad minor piece.  Well it was simple to grind him down game after game.  I wasn't playing for tricks or tactics or the clock, I stopped his counterplay and improved my pieces and went into winning endgames.

I'm not saying it's objectively good chess if you seriously analyzed it.  And the skills needed for tournament chess are different (correspondence, even more different).  But it's far from senseless time burning blundering all the time.

And you say it's frustrating to lose in a winning position.  Back when I didn't disable my chat I liked to tell my opponent (when they complained) "the difference between you and me is I could have won that position with 10 seconds left."

If you really understand your advantage, and have experience in converting it, all you need is premove to win.

I guess I'm agreeing and disagreeing.  It's not "real" chess, and there are differences in the skill set, but you can't make up for a few hundred rating points with a good mouse, good internet, and "tricks."  Whoever claims that I challenge them to prove it.  Raise your rating 100-200 points and post here.

My rating was 1270 in bullet when I posted here somewhere on the first page. By using my friends laptop when I was at his house one day it shot up to its current level of 1450.

You were rated 1492 on 19th July.

Haha, well I guess I have to eat my words a bit.  If your mouse is really crappy then of course you will just lose.  Especially in bullet.  Not much you can do there.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's necessary to be knowledgeable and experienced to have a high speed rating.  I suppose it's also necessary to have decent equipment (e.g. a mouse).  But neither of these are sufficient by themselves.

A low blitz rating doesn't mean you're bad at chess.  But a high blitz rating means you know a thing or two.  There was some chart they made a while ago.  1800 blitz was IIRC ~1800 FIDE.  Well that's not true for everyone of course, some will be higher, some lower, but I am confident that 1800 blitz can never be a player who is e.g. 1200 elo.  For "online" chess I'm not as sure.

Social panda if you read the pointlessly long thread before posting you would know what I attribute the peak to.

the peak was *gasp* when I was a premium member and the buggy ads were not slowing down my crappy comp.

I have no reason to lie and I am certainly not a skilled bullet player but my experience has lead me to see that say I were good at bullet my old computer would have held me back.

"but you can't make up for a few hundred rating points with a good mouse, good internet, and "tricks."  Whoever claims that I challenge them to prove it.  Raise your rating 100-200 points and post here."

Hmm, I actually think you can depending on what you mean. There are skills that are blitz-specific enough that you could not improve at chess at all but improve 100 or more points in blitz in a day if you learned those skills -- in just one day it would be difficult, but unlike in OTB chess, not unheard of. Obviously this applies more so if you're not so good at blitz -- eventually blitz-specific skill building will have diminishing returns and your lack of "real chess skill" will hold you back. (Then again guys like Marc Esserman have seemingly found a way to get to 2900 in bullet rather suddenly.)

A better mouse is a little extreme, but just figuring out how you have to adjust your mindset to take what you know about chess and use it effectively for the unique time limit can result in massive improvement in blitz without improvement in chess in general. And I would be willing to bet quite a lot on that claim. You spend so much time replaying ideas you already know in blitz that you have no time to learn something new. Maybe an opening trap or something but that's as far as it really goes.

Oh, and no I'm not going to spend hours proving my claim by actually doing it. If the argument works I don't need to, and I don't need to take that kind of time out of my life to try to convince you further.