Let me state my opinion on this:
For the improving beginner, I think blitz chess (if done regularily) is an awful idea.
I think if blitz is to be done for a beginner, it should be 10 0 - and rapid/slow would be much better.
If it is the only option for improvement, no slow games or chess books are available, it's probably better than nothing.
(especially if you use it to get better at openings or tactics - but if you aren't, how could it really be counted as useful for improvement?)
I bet that if you quit blitz for 3-6 months, only played standard/rapid - and read (studied) "Soviet Chess primer" (Quality chess) cover to cover (with a board) your skill would be at least 1200 (likely higher - Dvoretsky went from class C/D to 2000ish in a summer from that book) within that 6 month period.
the real question is what will provide more improvement per unit time: blitz or classical?
How many times do I have to keep repeating myself?
I wrote in my first sentence that the best way for a beginner to improve his chess game is to play 30/0 games.
Why don't you read what I wrote?
I wasn't just addressing you, but also some of the responders.
Also, 30+0 is far from the best time control, which would ideally be something closer to standard tournament time controls. It's better than 5+0 though.
tip for beginners
. . .
I have read a lot of posts on these forums from higher rated players that [disagree with my tip] Nonsense
. . .
I just started playing in January
Name one other skill where people with a few months of experience know better than professional trainers and enthusiasts with decades of experience.
Of course, this is so obvious that it makes me think you're trolling.
Blitz isn't bad for some quick experience, but it can develop bad habits and in any case is far from ideal.
Although perhaps the golden rule of improvement early on is simply to play a lot. I think getting the first 100 or so losses out of the way is important. So especially if you enjoy playing blitz, sure, go for it. After that though I'd stop, read a book, play longer games, all the usual stuff.
Who's arguing that?
You are. You say in the OP that:
the best time control for beginners if they want to improve is 30/0
the next best time control. That would be a 5/0 blitz game.
You also mention 15/10, but you never mention OTB tournament length games.
Hey the_patzerr I sent you a friend request. I am no Jennifer Shahade but let's chat awhile love.
Randi
tip for beginners
. . .
I have read a lot of posts on these forums from higher rated players that [disagree with my tip] Nonsense
. . .
I just started playing in January
Name one other skill where people with a few months of experience know better than professional trainers and enthusiasts with decades of experience.
Of course, this is so obvious that it makes me think you're trolling.
Blitz isn't bad for some quick experience, but it can develop bad habits and in any case is far from ideal.
Although perhaps the golden rule of improvement early on is simply to play a lot. I think getting the first 100 or so losses out of the way is important. So especially if you enjoy playing blitz, sure, go for it. After that though I'd stop, read a book, play longer games, all the usual stuff.
Of course it's a troll. I was planning on making something exactly like this.
Hey_Randi wrote:
Hey the_patzerr I sent you a friend request. I am no Jennifer Shahade but let's chat awhile love.
Randi
Thanks Randi
Sure I'll be your friend!
Most would say that trolling on chess.com is considerably more relaxed than trolling on the rest of the internet.
Here, it extends down to simply spreading hilariously wrong info (in a nice, helpful manner) and laughing as you bait in a bunch of responders who think it's serious.
I know exactly that feeling, by the way.
Troll = contentious for its own sake. Trolls want to generate replies. You may not be a troll, but your OP is identical to what a troll does.
Yeah let me in on the joke SquareBlitz. Most of the time when people write lol is because they can't verbally articulate their thoughts.
Blitz is good for opening exploration and pattern recognition. Aside from those two things - in my opinion - it's just plain fun. It's not good for your game to play continuous blitz if you're serious about improvement though.
Unless the specific person have problems playing quick, he should definetely play blitz 3+2 5+5.
They need experience - perfect , more games the better for short time.
They need to train tactics - Perfect again, this time control provide instand blunder check.
At low level there is no need for calculation, planning and strategy. Leave that when you get 1500~ blitz. It's all about tactics. Learn to move a piece to safe square and spot the ones ur opponents gives to you. You wont have bad habbits if you do it right.
the real question is what will provide more improvement per unit time: blitz or classical?
How many times do I have to keep repeating myself?
I wrote in my first sentence that the best way for a beginner to improve his chess game is to play 30/0 games.
Why don't you read what I wrote?