Oops I read the wrong poster lol, sorry mistaken identity.
I am ridiculously bad at blitz
Sort:
Uhohspaghettio1 wrote:
dpnorman, you've proven yourself full of crap the moment you spoke about blitz meaning something.
Blitz means nothing, just get that through your head. There's nothing "funny" okay?
Look at your post, all kinds of excuses and well what if this or that, just shut the **** up. You sound about 12.
Wow calm down!
Right, clearly we have some geniuses in the house.
Kirby says he can't believe you that you have 1400-1500 blitz at 1800 OTB. Even if you were in an inflated (not deflated) area. Fine. I've played with dpnorman since last year when I was 1290 and he was just under 1200. And I can tell you, at least until the last couple tournaments he is UNDERRATED OTB. His strengths are in gaining small advantages positionally and suffocation. Two things that don't translate into blitz play. That aside, I've always been way higher standard than blitz or bullet myself. dp and I have similar play styles. I'm 1600 rating but really because I haven't played much. Only tournament last 6 months was a 5-0-0. Yet I haven't figured out blitz either.
I think it has something to do with the whole "I have to play fast" mentality while taking the same approach to looking at the board. For whatever reason in blitz I've been at 1100 one day then 1400 few days later simply because I'm 'in the zone' or what have you.
I can also attest to him improving a lot in OTB looking at his games. but forever reason when we play blitz we both play the same shitty old blitz we played last year
ChristopherZiffo wrote:
blitz on here is ridiculously hard. The ratings are about 200- 250 points to low for everybody. mine is 330 lower. no idea why!
Why do you think your blitz rating here shuould have any correlation with your OTB ratings?
I also think the blitz ratings on this site are fairly low relative to the strength of the players (compared to Correspondence ratings not sure about OTB). For example a 1200 I played on blitz played significantly better than 1500s on correspondence and I don't just mean relative to the time control I mean their actual play was stronger until very late in the game.
mosey69 wrote:
I also think the blitz ratings on this site are fairly low relative to the strength of the players (compared to Correspondence ratings not sure about OTB). For example a 1200 I played on blitz played significantly better than 1500s on correspondence and I don't just mean relative to the time control I mean their actual play was stronger until very late in the game.
I guess you did a study or have some type of emperical data on this?
Feb 12, 2015
0
#29
Skeleize wrote:
@dpnorman i think that's the way it is. Your blitz rating on this site is always 300-400 points lower than your actual OTB rating. If you want your online chess to equal your OTB rating, then you should be playing correspondence or rapid chess (15|10 or 30|0) or maybe 45|45
Call me Grandmaster 
I'm just conveying my experience I wasn't claiming it was totally objective.
...I could post some example games if that helps?
Till_98 wrote:
Not until you improve your Chess960, which some GMs say is the TRUE indication of your chess skill.
Skeleize wrote:
@dpnorman i think that's the way it is. Your blitz rating on this site is always 300-400 points lower than your actual OTB rating. If you want your online chess to equal your OTB rating, then you should be playing correspondence or rapid chess (15|10 or 30|0) or maybe 45|45
Call me Grandmaster
Feb 12, 2015
0
#32
Debistro wrote:
Till_98 wrote:
Skeleize wrote:
@dpnorman i think that's the way it is. Your blitz rating on this site is always 300-400 points lower than your actual OTB rating. If you want your online chess to equal your OTB rating, then you should be playing correspondence or rapid chess (15|10 or 30|0) or maybe 45|45
Call me Grandmaster
Not until you improve your Chess960, which some GMs say is the TRUE indication of your chess skill.
Thats not fair, I lost on time in all of these games 
I think a blitz rating on here of 1500 is pretty good, probably not that far off 1800 OTB for regular games, especially if you are not a teenager.
You also have to account for the fact that some people are stronger in blitz than in regular time controls and vice versa. People who can calculate and spot tactics quickly excel in blitz whereas in longer time controls positional understanding is more important.
Cheats may well be dragging down folks' blitz ratings.
Just like what happened about 4 months back with the Standard Ratings, and the NM @FLChessplayer controversy in the Cheating Forum. He couldn't get his Blitz rating above 1500, despite playing nearly 100 games, and already having won multiple Bullet tourneys on this site.
As for the OP, it makes no sense that his BLITZ rating is lower than his Bullet rating, thus contradicting his original post, since he clearly plays well at faster time controls.
So, a reasonable conclusion is -- this thread is BS, most likely the OP is too.
Whatever.
kleelof wrote:
mosey69 wrote:
I also think the blitz ratings on this site are fairly low relative to the strength of the players (compared to Correspondence ratings not sure about OTB). For example a 1200 I played on blitz played significantly better than 1500s on correspondence and I don't just mean relative to the time control I mean their actual play was stronger until very late in the game.
I guess you did a study or have some type of emperical data on this?
I think it's fairly obvious without need for any data.
zborg wrote:
Cheats may well be dragging down folks' blitz ratings.
Just like what happened about 4 months back with the Standard Ratings, and the NM @FLChessplayer controversy in the Cheating Forum. He couldn't get his Blitz rating above 1500, despite playing nearly 100 games, and already having won multiple Bullet tourneys on this site.
As for the OP, it makes no sense that his BLITZ rating is lower than his Bullet rating, thus contradicting his original post, since he clearly plays well at faster time controls.
So, a reasonable conclusion is -- this thread is BS, most likely the OP is too.
Whatever.
Edit it again, knowitall
1800 OTB but 1400 blitz here story seems too unreasonable to be true. A normal 1800 player should be much stronger than a 1400 on this site.
zborg wrote:
As for the OP, it makes no sense that his BLITZ rating is lower than his Bullet rating, thus contradicting his original post, since he clearly plays well at faster time controls.
So, a reasonable conclusion is -- this thread is BS, most likely the OP is too.
Whatever.
It might be argued that bullet chess isn't really chess at all. Especially with premove, guessing, and hardly calculating at all. It's plausible that if you work hard at bullet chess and all the little tricks you could be much better than your blitz... and yet be bad at fast chess.
blitz on here is ridiculously hard. The ratings are about 200- 250 points to low for everybody. mine is 330 lower. no idea why!