I'm done with blitz.

Sorry - I have to vent. I just can't take it anymore.

1. Almost every single person on here can somehow play faster than me and can win on time. If I try to play quickly I mess up.

2. Everyone plays better than their rating suggests. 1700 players are vicious. I can't trust anyone because engine use is common.

I know for a fact that I can play better than my rating suggests, but I can't, because I am a slow thinking person. I know, terrible, right?

I'll stick to slow games - you can keep your awful blitz.

What are you talking about? You've only played 29 games and relative to the strength of the pools, your blitz rating is far better than your standard rating. If this is genuine, you're a complete moron.

 10|0 is about the fastest blitz time control I'm any good at and I'm not even that good then 

Will play some faster but invariably will only play a few games since I play poorly that fast.

Your blitz rating is also better than your standard rating. Idiots...

Again, the sticky link:

https://www.chess.com/blog/smarterchess/chesscom-rating-comparison-2015

Your ratings:

standard: 1714

blitz: 1672

WIth a chess.com standard rating of 1714, your blitz rating should be around 1500 on chess.com ratings per the survey link above.

So you are actually OUTPERFORMING your standard rating at blitz by nearly 100 points, based upon chess.com ratings. You should be complaining that you're too good at blitz relative to your standard rating based on your numbers.

Has everybody gone crazy? There are no stats relating to standard chess ratings on here anywhere.

Conventional wisdom has it that blitz rating here is about 100-200 LOWER than someone's FIDE or USCF would be. 

That said, there are many outliers. My own blitz is currently 96 points ABOVE my FIDE (2051 vs. 1955). 

I like to believe that it's because I don't have many opportunities to play FIDE games and raise my rating... who knows? Maybe I'm right. 

But that's beside the point. Think of 1700 blitz players as people who would be 1800-1900 OTB. That isn't far from the truth as a general rule. 

Chess.com calls games as long as, e.g., 30 minutes "Live Chess - Standard"

If you think that I am a moron you must have never seen an actual moron. How about giving me some constructive criticism instead of resorting to petty insults that I don't even care about?

29 games is enough for me to decide if I like the format or not.

I know rough equivalencies can be drawn, but I think it's generally fallacious to compare blitz rating and standard rating--roughly to the extent that it's fallacious to compare one's OTB ratings in Chess and Xiangqi, for instance--for various reasons mentioned (different skills, greater rating disparities, etc.). Therefore, a 1672 rating in Blitz Chess on this site is pretty commendable on its own, and that's all it really means.

As a fellow slow mover, I understand your frustration. But, again, Blitz Chess isn't really bad, just different.

Thanks for your feedback - I guess I am just a little frustrated!

I might give Blitz another go - but I just hate losing on time in a won/drawn position!

Blitz is a different skill.  You have to practice to be any good at it. One of the good things about blitz is that you have to speed up your thinking to win at it.  I know people say blitz is rubbish, but my slow game has improved a lot, though I nearly always play blitz now.

I have a relative with Down syndrome. I know exactly what a moron sounds like. This is exactly the kind of thing I can picture him saying. You might as well say that Aguero scoring 3 goals in a game is less of an achievement than Root scoring 5 runs in an innings. That is purely an extension of your logic. Sound. The fact that you've only played 29 games is just the icing on a cake that was already well and truely made.

Really? Care to explain where you are getting your numbers for me?

• 1210 Blitz
• 1389 Rapid

Those are my current ratings. Explain to me how 1210 is better than 1389?

Maybe think of it like currency. Some are worth more than others ;)

USD is based only on US economy. Blitz is based only on other blitz players. If all the blitz players on a website are GMs, then a rating of 1200 is huge.

That is a good way of explaining it. Great currency analogy.

Try putting a 5 second bonus into your blitz games, and you might find your Standard and Blitz ratings become rather similar over time.

That's assuming you run into roughly equal numbers of cheats at both time controls.  

Typically there are more cheats at slower time controls, as per discussions in the Cheating Forum.

I didn't know about the rating comparison on this site, so sue me. I am grateful that it was brought to my attention by hhnngg1.

I am intelligent, and I have been told so by intelligent people. But avoiding that, the chess.com basic site rules say that "there should be no abusive language, personal attacks, threats, or any other unkind behavior." Your insults don't bother me, but you are still breaking that rule.

You sound pretty egotistical and irratable to me, and not a great person to be around. I seriously doubt a moron would be able to say all of this to you.

Based on the ratings of other players on the site my rapid is higher percentage-wise than blitz. 79.1 vs 72. So even among the other players my rapid is higher.

I won't claim my rapid is accurate, as I don't play very much. But it is higher. I usually do better with more time. My OTB regular rating is 1595 (all games played at G/60+).

You say the most useless things.