Do most beginners prefer longer time controls?

Sort:
Colby-Covington

Thanks for understanding.

How is your Blitz going anyways? Do I have to be worried for when we play?😏 You might be secretly becoming a master at the Albin Counter and crush me.

Bertovzki

Ha no Blitz is terrible , make bad blunders I need practice at speed games , just started playing again , played a guy in a club the other day he was rated 1300 something or just under 1400 , I forget , he bet me in both games , I was dominating in both games , especially the second game a piece up and missed a free rook I would never miss when not under time pressure , I really do not enjoy it much , just feel completely hopeless.

And as far as openings it only helps to a point , sometimes a lot , it depends , I have heard of the Albin Counter gambit , not looked at it yet , seen it in the London system played by Ginger , he was pointing out the position that arose in the game.

1600 rating is not secretly becoming a master , though I intend to get to know my openings deep enough that I can get stronger with the knowledge I already have , I only ever play the London now , so I am getting used to many variations and out of book moves

Bertovzki

What you wre saying about knowing an opening deep , but then your opponent makes out of book moves and you get stuck or simply just playing chess again instead of a script , well , if you understand the reasons for all the moves in the opening , and not just remembering a long sequence of moves , then you will know how to react to an out of book move , you will know its not the best move , so you ask yourself why i it not , there is a reason , and then play accordingly if you solve why

Colby-Covington

Yeah, I was talking in terms of my own games, hence 3 min Blitz. It is very difficult to adjust the movement pattern under such time pressure and find the alternate best move when your opponent doesn't play into the line due to mistakes. You're probably speaking from a daily perspective right? That's a whole different ballgame, man. Especially in highly aggressive variations that I like to play.

Colby-Covington

You are clearly not a beginner anymore, but do you prefer Rapid over Blitz?

Bertovzki

Yeah I am talking daily , I am starting to play blitz and rapid again , I just need some practice and adjust a bit and I will be fine

Colby-Covington

@SpiderUnicorn Yeah, but you're probably 2000 already, it's just about being concentrated and in the right mindset now to get the number right, but your strength is most likely already there.

I'm in a similar situation. Took a little break from playing in order to study up on some stuff, so I can finally crack 2300.

In Blitz you'll flactuate way harder I think, but the exhilaration is priceless.

Colby-Covington

Oh yeah, I blocked @btickler for lying about his figures and probably trolling btw. That guy has other problems to worry about I believe.

Bertovzki wrote:

Yeah I am talking daily , I am starting to play blitz and rapid again , I just need some practice and adjust a bit and I will be fine

You need faster openings for Blitz, I personally think Gambits are the only way. What gambit openings do you currently know?

Bertovzki

None , but have intended to look at some , I watched Eric Rosen go through a list of all gambits he could think of which was a long list

Colby-Covington

Let's learn a new one together!

I am currently brushing up on the Traxler Gambit/Albin, but I have always wanted to go deep into the Evans.

I think the Traxler would be perfect for <1500 because alot of people play the fried liver still.

Bertovzki

I forgot about the Evans , I know the Evans better than any opening and can play my strongest game in it , I would beat 1900 rated engine % 50 of the time with the Evans , I do not play it because most people do not go into that line , playing 4 nights or Phillador or something else so I stopped trying , you could force a similar line with the wing gambit b4 , I have studied it deeply and used to know all the famous games by memory , Kasparov Anand , Fischer , Morphy etc..

Bertovzki

I will look at the Ablin / Traxler a bit latter when I have cleared some daily moves

 

HabSoSlIQuch

at the beginning i prefered playing with no time.

Colby-Covington

Do you play any gambits in Blitz? What openings do you usually play?

Colby-Covington
Jessica_098 wrote:

Yeah, I think it's understandable that beginners prefer longer time control since they probably don't know much about openings in general. As you improve, you sort of memorize these things and you will take less time to play and still maintain a good level. 

That being said, there are some players that simply cannot adapt to lower time control and just feel more comfortable having more time to play. I am one of those people, while I find bullet games fun, I simply cannot handle time pressure very well and my mind just goes blank when I take more time than I should to find a move.

You are doing well though, at 2100. I know exactly what you mean with regards to "your mind going blank under time pressure", because I have experienced the exact same thing in Blitz. Staying calm under pressure is also just another skill that needs to be imroved in chess, I believe. I also like to take advantage of it when I play aggressive gambits.

CorporateChessGuy

Hi All. I am just trying to help. I am just trying to help. Hi All.I see people want to reach 1800 ratings, but it only achieve able with hard work and being discipline as you have to spent time on a regular basis. Let me tell you a fact that, even i was 1200 here in chessdotcom and have reached 1900+ in 4 years because I was not regularly playing.I used to play only 3 months in a whole year which is not good enough.I didn't even try to think like 1500, 1700, 1900 mind sets in the game. Just be regular and try to play higher rated opponents so that you will come to know your weakness in your game. I stream chess games, puzzles ,puzzles battle for 1200-1800 rated players on regular basics and play with all people who wanted to feel how 1800 rated player game taste like.You can add me as friend and send challenges on chess.com. (Username you know already).You can catch me on www.twitch.com/corporatechessguy for livestream. I hope you all get a chance to play with 1800 Player like me, as other high rated players don't except challenges from lower rated player to be honest. Hoping to receive more friend request on chessdotcom and followers on twitch. Most important, you are always welcome to try out your tournament practise with me. Let's play together!

Caesar49bc
Colby-Covington wrote:
Galaxy_Chess_God wrote:

I actually have been seeing counter gambits a lot from queen gambit so i change to scotch game

Trust me, do some research on the Albin Counter Gambit, you will get some easy wins, especially <2000 you will crush easily with it. 

Here is one variation called the Lasker Trap, Coming up, I can't tell you how many people I obliterated with this and similar lines.

 

I occasionally find opponents, playing black, that resign the moment they realise I actuallly can play white against the Albin Counter Gambit.



Nicator65
Colby-Covington wrote:
btickler wrote:
Colby-Covington wrote:

You specifically claimed that the majority of chess players do not use any time controls at all [...]

OMG.  Yes...stay with me here....because it's true.  The majority of chess players do not use time controls (as defined by FIDE, or any chess rules or governing body, or any reasonable chess player, or any reasonable person with even a smattering of knowledge about chess) at all.

As much as I appreciate your insight and extensive chess knowledge, your statement is in essence, nonsensical. Regardless, of how you want to define the term "time control" it will always indicate a certain period of time that forcefully determines the end of a game when said time period has elapsed.

If, as per your suggestion, the majority plays without any time control at all, that logically implies they do not adhere to any time limit whatsoever, thus granting each player infinite amounts of time, which by definition would violate the most basic rules of chess, stating that both parties must continue to play until a drawing or check mate position is reached.

If you still remain unable to recognize that irrefutable logic, then I must reluctantly move on.

 

Somehow I believe you don't have much experience with casual games without a clock. There's no unlimited time. If you take too long to make a move the other guy will complain, and eventually leave if you don't move. So no "infinite" time as you suppose.

However, that's not a time control because the amount is not fixed before the start of the game.

And on beginners, most don't enjoy clocks. It's distracting and they have a lot in hands just trying to figure it out what to do next. Clocks are a preference of competitive players, regardless of their level. That said, and talking about online chess, a good amount of people choose to play with shorter time controls not because they like it but because they have had experiences with "engine support", and there's the belief that a faster time control reduces the chances of playing an engine.

adrtt7yuhh

extremely high rated players,old players,and patzers do. I am a semi beginner,and I prefer the quicker side of rapid, 20 min, 15 min

DiogenesDue

Btw, let me state for the record that a few pages back when Colby kept on posting refutations of my posts and I suddenly seemed to drop off the earth, it's because Colby had blocked me without saying he had and then kept posting stuff knowing I would not be able to reply.  I'm not going to go back now and pick up the argument, because everybody knows that most people worldwide that play chess casually don't use clocks and don't know anything about time controls.