Forums

BULLET TAKES MORE SKILL THAN OTB CHESS

Sort:
snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#41

I don't understand how normal chess is better.A quote from a GM said

"I play bullet chess as I believe it requires more logical thinking in a shorter period of time, and hence it helps my standard games as I am able to think of a variety of strong moves under time pressure." 

Proves my point kiddos

mattyf9
mattyf9
Show your flair!
Oct 6, 2012
0
#42
snip3z wrote:
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. 

2100 bullet rating in only a year.  Wow.  I guess you're just way smarter than me.  Or you have alot more time on your hands.

Scottrf
Scottrf
Oct 6, 2012
0
#43

"a GM"

Legit source.

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#44
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
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. 

2300 bullet rating in only a year.  Wow.  I guess you're just way smarter than me.  Or you have alot more time on your hands.

Probably Smarter

waffllemaster
waffllemaster
Oct 6, 2012
0
#45
Scottrf wrote:
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.

I never said in general.  My meaning was in theory it's undeniably more difficult, but in practice this is not how the results should be interpreted.  Maybe you misread my post?

You saying quicker chess is not more skill because the quality decreases is vague, and at face value it's laughable.  The quality decreases in proportion to the skill required to do well.  This is true for anything and is inarguable.  However as I pointed out this isn't always a correct interpretation in practice.


I still think we're saying the same thing... the way you say it is vague at best (and IMO wrong at face value), and the way I say it probably offends your stance, so you don't bother to read it carefully the whole way though.

mattyf9
mattyf9
Show your flair!
Oct 6, 2012
0
#46
snip3z wrote:
mattyf9 wrote:
snip3z wrote:
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. 

2300 bullet rating in only a year.  Wow.  I guess you're just way smarter than me.  Or you have alot more time on your hands.

Probably Smarter

Smarter, and younger.

Scottrf
Scottrf
Oct 6, 2012
0
#47
waffllemaster wrote:

I never said in general.  My meaning was in theory it's undeniably more difficult, but in practice this is not how the results should be interpreted.  Maybe you misread my post?

You saying quicker chess is not more skill because the quality decreases is vague, and at face value it's laughable.  The quality decreases in proportion to the skill required to do well.  This is true for anything and is inarguable.  However as I pointed out this isn't always a correct interpretation in practice.


I still think we're saying the same thing... the way you say it is vague at best (and IMO wrong at face value), and the way I say it probably offends your stance, so you don't bother to read it carefully the whole way though.

Bit of an insulting reply, I'll leave it there.

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#48
Scottrf wrote:

"a GM"

Legit sauce.

waffllemaster
waffllemaster
Oct 6, 2012
0
#49

Yeah, I usually try not to be a dick.  Sorry Tongue Out

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#50
waffllemaster wrote:

I never said in general.  My meaning was in theory it's undeniably more difficult, but in practice this is not how the results should be interpreted.  Maybe you misread my post?

You saying quicker chess is not more skill because the quality decreases is vague, and at face value it's laughable.  The quality decreases in proportion to the skill required to do well.  This is true for anything and is inarguable.  However as I pointed out this isn't always a correct interpretation in practice.


I still think we're saying the same thing... the way you say it is vague at best (and IMO wrong at face value), and the way I say it probably offends your stance, so you don't bother to read it carefully the whole way though.

tl;dr

Fear_ItseIf
Fear_ItseIf
Oct 6, 2012
0
#51

will_gr
will_gr
Oct 6, 2012
0
#52
snip3z's ratings:
 
Blitz: 1914
Bullet: 2322
Asshole: 4275
 
 
mattyf9
mattyf9
Show your flair!
Oct 6, 2012
0
#53
will_gr wrote:
snip3z's ratings:
 
Blitz: 1914
Bullet: 2322
Asshole: 4275
 
 

ahahahaha.  Everybody in their college years is a know it all.  We were all there once.  I'm sure he's a good guy and will come around soon.

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#54
[COMMENT DELETED]
netzach
netzach
Oct 6, 2012
0
#55

Better be careful @ snip3z.

Too much bullet can make people somewhat 'manic' ?

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#56
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:

Who honestly cares about bullet ratings? It is all about standard and blitz ratings, more so standard.

You're somewhat right, however some of the standard chess foundations are built off playing bullet chess. If you're a high rater otb you'll understand this.

Fear_ItseIf
Fear_ItseIf
Oct 6, 2012
0
#57
Paolo_Vacarelli wrote:

That is why the chess world (and the world in general) cheered when this year's Chess World Championship came down to a few bullet games. 

They were rapid games, I actually think bullet wouldve been good to watch lol

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#58
Shadowknight911 wrote:

this a$$hole is obviously ACivilizedGentlemen reincarnated.

They don't give out any championships for being good at bullet.

so... what's your otb rating?

snip3z
snip3z
Oct 6, 2012
0
#59
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:

Snip3z, hes an 11or 12 year old kid that's 2050ish OTB.

it's funny how you take a troll thread so seriously. No, i'm not 11 or 12, and no i'm 2050 otb. 

mattyf9
mattyf9
Show your flair!
Oct 6, 2012
0
#60
snip3z wrote:
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:

Snip3z, hes an 11or 12 year old kid that's 2050ish OTB.

it's funny how you take a troll thread so seriously. No, i'm not 11 or 12, and no i'm 2050 otb. 

What is the point of this thread?  Did you just start this  thread to announce how good you're rating is?