BULLET TAKES MORE SKILL THAN OTB CHESS
Sort:
The best opning
Oct 6, 2012
0
#23
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
Really? Lets all applaud snip3z on how good he is at everything. I feel better now.
Thanks man!
lol. As good as you are at bullet, you seem to lack the ability to detect sarcasm lol. 
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
Really? Lets all applaud snip3z on how good he is at everything. I feel better now.
Thanks man!
lol. As good as you are at bullet, you seem to lack the ability to detect sarcasm lol.
read the quote kiddo. i see no sarcasm intended in that one....
Oct 6, 2012
0
#25
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
Really? Lets all applaud snip3z on how good he is at everything. I feel better now.
Thanks man!
lol. As good as you are at bullet, you seem to lack the ability to detect sarcasm lol.
read the quote kiddo. i see no sarcasm intended in that one....
Yea. No kidding you don't...kiddo!
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
Really? Lets all applaud snip3z on how good he is at everything. I feel better now.
Thanks man!
lol. As good as you are at bullet, you seem to lack the ability to detect sarcasm lol.
read the quote kiddo. i see no sarcasm intended in that one....
Yea. No kidding you don't...kiddo!
and you didn't see the sarcasm in my reply.... you sir need some help. kthxbye
Oct 6, 2012
0
#27
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
Really? Lets all applaud snip3z on how good he is at everything. I feel better now.
Thanks man!
lol. As good as you are at bullet, you seem to lack the ability to detect sarcasm lol.
read the quote kiddo. i see no sarcasm intended in that one....
Yea. No kidding you don't...kiddo!
and you didn't see the sarcasm in my reply.... you sir need some help. kthxbye
lol what a weirdo.
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
waffllemaster wrote:
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
Thankyou, I appreciate your feedback :)
:D
waffllemaster wrote:
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
No, not more skill, as I said, different skill. Of course a 2300 bullet player is better than a 2100 bullet player, but they aren't 'better' than a 2300 blitz player.
Playing the same quality of moves quicker takes more skill, but bullet chess sacrifices quality for speed.
No wonder why all you guys are so mad (except for waffllemaster) all your bullet ratings are horrible.... Come on Kiddos pick up ya act
Ur standard rating likewise (1289) I THINK?i agree with scott ,its a different skill.....but u think playing one minute games is a good quality chess it is not even near the normal time chess....
Scottrf wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
but they aren't 'better' than a 2300 blitz player.
Playing the same quality of moves quicker takes more skill.
So you're saying Playing quicker = playing better than a 2300 blitz player? CHEERS KIDDO! <3
Scottrf wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
No, not more skill, as I said, different skill. Of course a 2300 bullet player is better than a 2100 bullet player, but they aren't 'better' than a 2300 blitz player.
Playing the same quality of moves quicker takes more skill, but bullet chess sacrifices quality for speed.
Pretty much saying the same thing. Theory vs practice or something like that.
Oct 6, 2012
0
#37
snip3z wrote:
No wonder why all you guys are so mad (except for waffllemaster) all your bullet ratings are horrible.... Come on Kiddos pick up ya act
I'm still very much a beginner. My online rating just surpassed 1600 which I was proud of. My live rating still stinks though. I like playing 5-2 minute games i can handle that. But bullet is just way too crazy for me.
[no image spamming, esp. with profanity - mod.]
waffllemaster wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
Anyway...
Of course speed chess takes more skill... stronger players give time odds not weaker players. Weaker players get more time because it's easier to avoid mistakes. The post with the 2100 blundering supported his point :p
But here the performance (or rather, lack thereof) is no longer an accurate reflection of the skill involved, but of the constraints which have made the contest impractical.
No, not more skill, as I said, different skill. Of course a 2300 bullet player is better than a 2100 bullet player, but they aren't 'better' than a 2300 blitz player.
Playing the same quality of moves quicker takes more skill, but bullet chess sacrifices quality for speed.
Pretty much saying the same thing. Theory vs practice or something like that.
Na it's not saying the same thing. You said speed chess takes more skill in general. It only takes more skill if you're playing the same quality of moves, which you aren't. I'm saying quicker chess is not more skill because the quality decreases. You can't just highlight similar words and claim we're making the same point.
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
No wonder why all you guys are so mad (except for waffllemaster) all your bullet ratings are horrible.... Come on Kiddos pick up ya act
I'm still very much a beginner. My online rating just surpassed 1600 which I was proud of. My live rating still stinks though. I like playing 5-2 minute games i can handle that. But bullet is just way too crazy for me.
Dw, i'm a beginner as well. I only started playing chess last year.