Correspondence Chess (high brow) VS Blitz (low class)

Correspondence chess is for the chess aristocracy. Blitz is for the lower classes, unwashed masses.
Correspondence chess is like fine dining at a classy restaurant -- while Blitz is like a greasy burger with plastic cheese.

How do we popularize Correspondence chess and elevate the masses from their plight?

I like them both.

Correspondence chess is it's own thing. you either enjoy it or you don't. I like having time to think.

I rarely play time frames less than one day. I'm terrible at fast play. I'm only marginally better at daily games, but better none the less.

As much as I like correspondence chess, the best of the best here play blitz and bullet.

I highly doubt you'd be able to convince this dude to play a daily game: https://www.chess.com/member/magnuscarlsen

Propper correspondence chess is not played on sites such as Lichess, or Chess com if you won't to rub shoulders with some legends, earn yourself a real chance at a normal in correspondence chess then only one site to play on that I.C C F.

ICCF allows engines. Not the kind of chess I would want to play.

Serious?! If true, why would anyone want to play ICCF?

It's not just mindless use of an engine, like running it for N days and playing the top move. It is about using several engines, knowing their strengths and weaknesses, applying your chess understanding to pick the right move, etc.

Human + engines > an engine.

If you are into this kind of stuff, it is perfectly fine and can be fun. I am not.

Ah, i see. Not for me. Thanks!

it's true. ICCF allows engine use. That type of chess is not about one person winning over another. It's about the search for perfect in any given position. Imagine entire games just being a long list of opening theory. My understanding is that most games end in a draw.

Chess.com "Daily" is correspondence chess......online!

There are a lot of really stupid and delusional people out there.

I believe some national chess correspondance organizations such as US chess correspondance don't allow computers, and neither of course does this website. That I can have some respect for.

Personally I believe there should be a rule that someone only spend a few minutes on a position and move on, because otherwise the problem with correspondance is it can easily drift into who studies the position the most, consulting literature about the position, and so on.

Overall correspondance for me is way, way down the list of intelligence - with a lot of pseudointellectuals.

Think about how almost no top player since Alekhine bothers with correspondance. When you get to a certain level you don't need the board anymore, so you could start thinking about it automatically instead of thinking about things you should be thinking of. All these correspondance games part of your every day life, no thanks.

I thank you greatly! Being retired and still considered young is a compliment, even if in a condescending manner. To be sure, you're correct, there are waves of insanely stupid and delusional self-appointed authorities all around us. It seems like CC has more than its share.

But every top player since Alekhine has consulted correspondence chess games. Either they themselves or any number of people who help him prepare for a game or a match. correspondence chess is where new theory is developed throughout all stages of the game. there have been endgames that have been solved through correspondence chess.

It's like saying a writer has no use for a dictionary, or a thesaurus. Or that running a 4 minute mile is not as much of an achievement as winning a 100 yard dash. every thing has its place.

That used to be the case long ago but not anymore - basically grunt work but so much of it is done that its useful to the GMs, who are otherwise only studying other GM games/preparation that probably don't have as many hours put into every single move. I kind of think of correspondance in the old days as being similar to putting a position into a computer engine in modern times - calculating at extraordinary depths but without the understanding of a top level player.

Yes, I know that. I'm playing "daily" games instead of blitz -- and find it much more fulfilling:
* Learning more deeply about chess (calculation, planning etc).
* Much higher quality of games (not mindless reactions in seconds).
* Flexibility (option to play many daily games or just the one).

I want others to have this same experience and am wondering how we promote it to players.

Correspondence Chess is overrated. Thinking an hour every move? Classical OTB is the best!

Correspondence was an interesting variant when letters were the dominant form of long distance communication since the ample time involved permitted virtually perfect play. Many opening ideas and variants were first explored in this context. However, computers and chess engines have rendered correspondence almost completely obsolete since the risk of engine play is so high. If I want to play stockfish, Ill just boot up my laptop and go to town. Additionally, any very high level correspondence games you see are likely created with engine assistance on both sides.

It's very likely that all future explorations of opening ideas will be done with engine assistance, making correspondence a futile and overall uninteresting game.

Most often I don't have the patience to play 10 minutes/rapid. Don't infer my degree of sophistication. Maybe I just have ADHD.