I like blitz, but...

Blitz is driving me away from chess.

Let me explain. One of the reasons I like chess is the challenge of fighting a battle based on nuances. In standard chess, one simple pawn move can have consequences much later in the game,  one can struggle to slowly change the focus of tension from one point of the board to the other, most of the time one is searching for the best move, which doesn’t mean that the consequences will be immediate, we struggle to see deeper, considering moves which, in a first glance, wouldn’t be considered, etc. I’m relatively new to chess, but I already experienced those thrills.

Blitz is more about fast pattern recognition… it’s not like “I can write the best text!”, but “I can write faster than you!”. It’s more like reflexes than reflection. In standard, with players of equal level, most of the time one will have to be able to explore minor errors, while in blitz it isn’t rare that the game is decided in a major blunder, being the initial construction useless and the end just a matter of formality or a struggle to delay mate in order to win on time. I just hate games which are decided on major blunders. It’s as if that was the only important move of the game.

Don’t get me wrong, I like blitz. I think it’s a good way to play a game when we’re short on time, a good way to exercise pattern recognition and to learn how to deal with time pressure and, sometimes, when I don’t lose or win the game through a terrible blunder, it can be fun.

The problem is that one of the reasons I like chess is that it is universal. One can find an opponent almost everywhere in the world and talk to a large group of people involved with the game. But, it seems that, rather than being an alternative way of playing, blitz seems to be asphyxiating standard chess. I’m not a great player, as you can see from my profile, but I also have very few games played until today (less than 200, I think), but, everywhere I go, people only want to play blitz. Here in chess.com, a site for turn based chess, I tried to find opponents for a long game and it seems to be a difficult task… most of the games popping on the screen are less than 10 minutes. Most of the games on youtube are blitz and one sees comments like “oh,no big deal, I have seen faster”.

It seems that the average chess player mind frame is changing and most begin to think of chess as a speed contest on pattern recognition. It’s like, IMHO, thinking that winners of those algebra operations contests are the best mathematicians. They have an ability for sure, but mathematics is much more than that.

We are coming to the point that when we talk about chess, it seems that, automatically, people are beginning to associate it with the 5 minute game they play. Like “oh, you were talking about long chess…”.

I’m not an experienced player, but I have read a lot already going around and talking to people that play chess.

You’ll say, go play long games and stop whining. I’m not whining. As I said, I like blitz, but I really prefer standard and would like to know from you if it will die or will restrict itself to a very small group of people.

While many people will argue that you still need lots of chess skill to play good blitz (which you do), it certainly streamlines the game. The standard of move played is much lower, and you miss out on all the little plans one can get out of a position.

What tends to happen with me is, after going on an oath never to play blitz again, I start playing it realize "hey, this is fun!" but after 5-10 straight games I realize how much duller the game has become, because one can only come up with relatively simple moves like 95% of the time for most people, and guess what, even weaker chess players aren't so bad at that! It's also annoying how people who think taking en passant is cool keep beating me with such cheap ideas. Anyway, I make a new oath and the cycle starts again.

I think to make it your main form of chess is to really miss out on the incredible depth that comes with choosing the best move or really figuring out a position. I honestly think people get so addicted to blitz they don't realize how much of the game they're actually missing.

that was actually an exceptional read.

  not really sure i have anything to add other than the fact that i hate winning due to a mistake by someone because of the time constraints. that said u can change the time to something more fitting. If u want to lessen the "BLUNDRS"

Blitz is fun to play, but standard is fun to watch and play, because the spectator has more time to get involved in the game. Standard is real chess, to me. I don't think standard chess is threatened by it's critics. I fear the Grandmaster blitz tournament tomorrow, may be unwatchable for me(Time control is 3min./2sec.increment!).

I like to play chess, but...

As an artist, I tend to relate Bullet/Blitz Chess to sketching, or even doodling.

I know I only play Blitz Chess on chess.com, but I want longer games in "real life".

For online play, I want a quick, I've got a few minutes to kill between chores or before bedtime, and I don't want to spend all night playing Chess.  if I am going to spend that much time playing Chess, I want to play against a real person, not an avatar.

Avatars are quite aware of the "You aren't real people" movement, yet they overcome those prejudices.

Thanks all of you for your points of view.

Elubas, dull is a good adjective. I think that regular is much richer. I went through some good players (not GMs) standard and blitz games and it was in the standard games that I was able to find the nice ideas: subtle moves, long term plans, unintuitive moves which renders hidden fruits etc.

Obviously one have to be skilled to play blitz, but it's like focusing on a single dimension where there are multiple ones. It's nice to get good at this single dimension, but sticking with it...

To me, blitz is 30 minutes for all moves and I really enjoy it. Shorter than that I constantly run into time trouble. Usually the longest I can interest people in playing on chess.com is 20|10. This has led to me start playing online chess recently and I'm enjoying it more than I thought I would. BTW, what you describe is not just an online phenomenom: when I go into my local chess club all people want to play is 5 minute blitz. I can occasionally talk someone into 10.

To me, blitz is like cotton candy--it tastes good and goes down easy, but it's cheap and leads to cavities and malnutrition.  For the last few years, I have been playing blitz because it's fun--nothing deeper than that.  But, two months ago, I began playing tournaments after a 23 year interval.  I have not played any speed since, and have no desire to.  I want a full-course meal now, steak and potatoes, not sweet little nothings.  When you really want the challenge of competition, blitz just doesn't cut it.

I don't know what planet you live on but it is self evident that Long chess or Standard is FAR superior to Blitz... You can not even begin to compare the beauty and majesty of a well thought out and impecably executed plans that occur in GM level games at standard time controlls to the incesant chepos of that five-minute skill-dulling practice some call blitz. 

 I think standard chess is the essence of chess. Blitz is just a way of having fun, and, how SRenault said, in Blitz it is not about who plays chess better, it is about who plays chess faster. But,SRenault, I don't think your "fear'', if I can call it like that, is without a reason. Even if today Blitz is becoming more popular than chess, real chess players like Kasparov, Fischer,Carlsen,Topalov,Anand,Kramnik, etc. are still playing standard chess. When they will say "Blitz rocks!! For all the chess lovers, stop wasting your time on standard chess-turtle's chess-we should all play blitz!", then your "fear" will be with reason.  

But I still agree with all the comments that were wrote above (except uhohspaghettio's). Even if I like Blitz we can only can call the standard chess "The Real Chess". By the way, if you like Blitz it is very good for you, I'm glad you enjoy it, but if you say that everyone should play Blitz instead of standard, I just think you are wrong!

I prefer standard chess but occasionally I play Blitz chess because of a lack of time. We can do a good job in both forms I think.  :)

I think blitz is a version of chess. It is faster, but still most of it is skill and not speed. Bullet in my opinion is more of a chess variant where speed is as important as skill if not more.

I don't really see the problem here.
Standard chess is for playing on clubs and other psychical events and are best designed for that. If you want to play longer games, join a chess club don't join an online things because of the reason below here.

Online chess is best suited for blitz chess, so generally people playing online are playing blitz.

It's like complaining aboutt that balls do not fit well in square containers when there are round containers available.

Several Grand Masters consider Blitz to be fun, yet not good for the development of chess skills at higher levels. It's usually very tactical, and not at all strategic.

WGM Pogonina, for example, has this opinion and has written on the subject.

I personally believe that Blitz is quite useful por people under 1800 ELO, like me, because in our games, everything is decided by tactical mistakes, and not by strategic planning (which is a characteristic that Blitz heightens even more)

On higher levels, I'm almost sure a Standard player will beat badly someone who only plays Blitz, because tactical errors  are far less likely to happen if not almost impossible at >2100 games.

Of course. A blitz player will always beat a non-blitz player in his field of expertise. But chess, traditional chess, is Standard, slow and thoughtfull.

What do you think =)?

As a musician i consider blitz similar to sight reading.

I agree, blitz might be fun as it challenges the mind with a low time response, but it doesn't quit give the full chess expertise.

Honestly uhohspaghettios, if you find standard incredibly dull, you probably don't like strategy a whole lot. But strategy is what makes me love this game, and long isn't just a glorified version of blitz, but, because it forces you in most cases to make use of every dimension of the game (rather than just short term tactics that you don't have time to calculate), a deeper game.

Like I said it can be quite fun and intense, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think most people prefer standard because it has more overall depth. I see some GMs on ICC losing to amateurs who clearly don't understand the game as well. Obviously the grandmasters are just playing for fun, but don't you think it minimizes their advantage in knowledge if both sides are forced into a situation where they don't have much time to apply their knowledge, rather play more on instinct and rush decisions. That's why grandmasters may enjoy it but don't take it so seriously.