Great! Thanks. I think I average 50. Don't have premium stats so am guessing.
Most games take about 25 moves?
Sort:
MojoJedi wrote:
If you post your won games to facebook or whatever, the post says "most games take 25 moves, xyz won by resignation in 56 moves", thereby conveniently making me look like a slowpoke. Do most games, in fact, take 25 moves? I am new to chess and hover around 1250 in blitz after 1000+ games, so don't know what the standard is.
The only ways a game can end in about 25 moves is if your oppponent or you blunder. The other is if one side does a premature attack and it works ..... for whatever numerous reasons. Which i do not suggest unless you are very famaliar with your opponent plus not playing for money as you might be getting Hustled into losing your money.
You're right. I think with average players, you've got the standard attacks and defenses in the opening and some pins and forks in the middle games. It's only in the end game that average player spots a break, like a free pawn or a cool knight move or doubled rooks. My two cents.
MojoJedi wrote:
Great! Thanks. I think I average 50. Don't have premium stats so am guessing.
Your average will more than likely depend on the openings being used in the game. As e4 games are tactical and quick attacks coming out of nowhere are possible. As others can go 60+ with both sides laying down the ground work for one band after another bang and then the Big Bang Theory.
Focus on how well you observed what is happening on the board let the number of moves take care of themselves. Else you maybe looking at your games ending in 10's. Yeah i over did it but you get the point. A couple of 100+ gives is very possible as a wounded animal is most dangerous when it is cornered and your getting frustrated and tired wondering how do i finish off my opponent. And your opponent knows they are going down and just wants to be difficult about the situation here. Having a series of these from time to time happens out of the blue.
@Royalbishop Oh yeah, important to observe closely. Happens in many end games that you have material advantage but the other guy has tempo and better development and your pieces end up all weird. I guess you have to keep developing, no matter the # of moves. I get hustled in pool, not in chess so far :)
The average is 40 moves.
Chess.com uses the same average to calculate and declare specific time controls under their category. (e.g. 10|10 is Standard)
I'm used to playing 20 minute chess against fairly good players, and one game did go over 100 moves, but i guess they would usually average about 45-60 moves.
royalbishop wrote:
MojoJedi wrote:
If you post your won games to facebook or whatever, the post says "most games take 25 moves, xyz won by resignation in 56 moves", thereby conveniently making me look like a slowpoke. Do most games, in fact, take 25 moves? I am new to chess and hover around 1250 in blitz after 1000+ games, so don't know what the standard is.
The only ways a game can end in about 25 moves is if your oppponent or you blunder. The other is if one side does a premature attack and it works ..... for whatever numerous reasons. Which i do not suggest unless you are very famaliar with your opponent plus not playing for money as you might be getting Hustled into losing your money.
Where did Bronstein blunder in this game? Or did Spassky get away with a premature attack?
How can anybody really know the average.
As we are all constantly playing games so the average will change.
Average move = Total # moves of all games / Total number of games.
Plus it is online and many cases you do not pick your opponent so you can play a 2000+ player(or close to it) and a 1300 rated player another game. In one game it may end in less than 20 moves or happen in both. If we expand it out to 10 games we could be here all day calculating.
Blundering in a won situation will add moves to game and will shorten it also sooner than it should and it happens to GM's but not as much.
25 seems about right to me
@Gil-gandel great game to post. I'm going out on a limb to say that that Bronstein was so focused on the center line opening with white's doubled up pawns, he developed his pieces very poorly. And with Spassky's queen and bishop lined up, it was too late. So may be, focusing on the center overly and not developing was bit of a blunder?
Sophetsu wrote:
I'm used to playing 20 minute chess against fairly good players, and one game did go over 100 moves, but i guess they would usually average about 45-60 moves.
If i had to go with a range i have to this is right on target. This is all fun but i have never seen a book on this subject and never will see it.
royalbishop wrote:
How can anybody really know the average.
As we are all constantly playing games so the average will change.
Average move = Total # moves of all games / Total number of games.
Okay, then. Start calculating.
I'm only telling what I've been told.
Yeah they said the world was flat.
Bla bla we found out they were wrong.
royalbishop wrote:
How can anybody really know the average.
As we are all constantly playing games so the average will change.
Average move = Total # moves of all games / Total number of games.
Plus it is online and many cases you do not pick your opponent so you can play a 2000+ player(or close to it) and a 1300 rated player another game. In one game it may end in less than 20 moves or happen in both. If we expand it out to 10 games we could be here all day calculating.
Blundering in a won situation will add moves to game and will shorten it also sooner than it should and it happens to GM's but not as much.
Statistic sampling would be the trick.
whatever bla bla bla
Stats does not work well with chess. Some how something goes wrong way ....out of the way. I want nothing to do with it. Now a stat i like is reducing the amount of mistakes and increasing forced moves. Destoyed mate threats and decreased amount of times missing a winning combination that leads to a direct or indirect win(win by material advantage).
Too many reasons why a batch of numbers may end around x number across Y number of games.
MojoJedi wrote:
@Gil-gandel great game to post. I'm going out on a limb to say that that Bronstein was so focused on the center line opening with white's doubled up pawns, he developed his pieces very poorly. And with Spassky's queen and bishop lined up, it was too late. So may be, focusing on the center overly and not developing was bit of a blunder?
I love that game. Technically you might say Bronstein blundered, but only if you can play like Spassky and prove it. After-the-fact analysis might show that Spassky's play wasn't flawless either, but the question is more whether it set Bronstein unsolvable problems over the board.
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
If you post your won games to facebook or whatever, the post says "most games take 25 moves, xyz won by resignation in 56 moves", thereby conveniently making me look like a slowpoke. Do most games, in fact, take 25 moves? I am new to chess and hover around 1250 in blitz after 1000+ games, so don't know what the standard is.