Strength in Quick and Blitz Chess = Strength in Turn-based?
Sort:
i do sometimes wonder is turn based chess effects your regular chess games. In turn based you can ponder a move for hours if not days. I wonder if this hinders quick decision making skills that a regular timed game requires.
I have played chess and blitz and both are quite fun. The time restraint on blitz is an obstacle to over come and doesn't detract from the game at all. Sometimes if I have made a mistake on blitz it was to my advantage, because my opponent becomes confused on what my stratagy is. I am okay at playing both sides with and without time. I choose to use about 5 day moves, because I only have the net at work and make my moves on breaks. But I have played chess with a person that would literally take 10 minutes to make one move and that was him playing fast. That isn't endurance, but just plain boring. Sometimes it is helpful to put a move timer on a game to get the other player to move.
Blitz can lead to bad habits. But is very fun! =D
The best players in slow games are the best blitz players. But we can't say that a very good blitz player is a very good slow player.
Apr 16, 2008
0
#24
gordo wrote: i do sometimes wonder is turn based chess effects your regular chess games. In turn based you can ponder a move for hours if not days. I wonder if this hinders quick decision making skills that a regular timed game requires.
Quite possible. As i said earlier, it's probably best to have a good mixture.
First it depends what do you mean by blitz. Is it 3 or 5 minutes as on ICC?
Secondly, I think that, if a GM (who knows hundreds of position by heart, who would spend almost no time in a theoretical endgame) could indeed play 3-5 minutes blitz, a normal player should not. Well, one could play just for fun, but they will not increase his strength. As an average, when playing online, it might be good to plat at around 15, 15+10seconds. After all, it's not OK to spend 2 hours in a game, while your opponent might use a computer to beat you. And there are "centaurs" everywhere (including on ICC).
Apr 16, 2008
0
#26
"I don't think time was composed for practical reasons."
Well, it's not really a matter of opinion, but of historical fact.
"I'm not convinved that time isn't a part of chess"
It IS a part of chess if we decide to make it a part; but it's not an Element of chess. The distinction seems pretty clear.
"Why is lightning or blitz less pure than long time controls?"
Pure is an interesting word I used for want of any other wordat the time, and now, thinking it over, I believe it's the correct word - Pure in the sense that in classical or longer time controls the essense of the game is more in the moves, and less in some artificial constriction (the time control). You can certainly argue whether a time control improves or diminishes chess, but you can't argue that it's a necessary ingredient - therefore, the more emphasis that is put on time, the more artificial and less pure the game becomes.
blitz is more fun and thats all that really matters 
Jan 17, 2009
0
#28
Your ratings are an indicator as to how you fare compared to all other players in the same 'pool' as yourself. Turnbased has one 'pool' of players, livechess has another seperate 'pool'. By this, there isnt any direct link, because one rating compares you to one section of players, and the other compares you to another section of players. The only constant is you ability which should put you in roughly the same place given two identically strengthed 'pools'.