Why do i suck at blitz?

How about long time standard games?
Where you play the entire game in the same sitting?

The only real chess for me is the standard classical game.Others are just variants.

By the way, having a notion of certain styles of chess not being "proper" is imo wrong and potentially harmful, its better to think of them as unsound, dubious or something along those lines. - Especially in blitz where, for instance, the simplistic caveman hack-attacks seem to score much better than in longer time controls.

I have never played more than a half hour game and even then mostly i only take up about ten minutes.  I have never played an over the board game, never clicked a chess clock.  Yes thankyou for the advice, it seems entirely correct, there is only sound and unsound.  I have noticed what you say about caveman attacks, cheapos rule, it appears that people will do anything for a tempo :)

Not only a tempo, but sometimes you have to sacrifice a pawn in order not to compromise your position. Since it can be easier to play fast chess a pawn down, than in a cramped and tight position. Or if you sacrifice a pawn, piece, or space in the center etc, for an attack that the opponent will have to spend time on defending precisely, while your attacking moves come naturally and without much thought. 

If you have any thoughts of wanting to play OTB chess, I'd suggest you to cut down on your CC and Blitz and start playing 'real' games. 

I think blitz is real chess, its no secret that Karpov, Anand, Fischer, Carlsen, Caruna etc etc were/are great blitz players, this is no coincidence for sure. I was debating in a club that i am in on here, the c4 club, with someone who was saying that blitz was like gambling, my point being that it cannot be the case otherwise there are some very lucky blitz players, who are consistently lucky, so i dont believe it, there is more to it than that. 

I get the impression that its entirely visual, purely relying upon pattern recognition and tactical foresight rather than deeply strategic.

Not sure why you're trying to go from cc directly to blitz. By skipping over standard and rapid time controls, that's like going from running marathons to the 100 meter dash. Maybe try a few 1,500 meter races first.

@ qrayons, its an excellent observation and i thank you for it, better to learn to crawl amd walk before one thinks about running :)

@robbie_1969: glancing at a few of blitz games in your archive I can say you have the skill to outplay opponents strategically but frequently miss possibilities to quickly finish the game using tactics or fail to see opponent's threats and defend against them

Maybe you haven't studied the basics yet ?!

Because knowledge of chess ideas is not equal to chess skill.

Strong OTB chess players are usually strong blitz players, but the reverse is not always true...

@dzikus, yes this is exactly true, because of my study i have a good strategic understanding, but when presented with positions that are sharp, i fail miserably, so my idea is, is to simply try to avoid sharp positions, but its not always possible because chess is so dynamic.

@hicetnuc, what do you suggest , for I dont mind reading anything, to be honest, if you have a suggestion on basics?

you probably need to speed up

play aggrressive and try traps

@ cardinal46, how old am I ? the same age as Anand and Gelfand, married with a family.  Born in 1969 (the summer of love) making me 44 :)  Do you think it significant?

@ alexpawn its quite funny i played the Urusov gambit in one of my games and it came back with results, I won a piece from the opening but then proceeded to give it back and ended up losing in a completely drawn position on time, classic King and pawn ending with the defender having the opposition.

Maybe some structured tactics book. If you like a conceptual approach, then Weteshnik's book has a good reputation (though I haven't used it but QC rarely disappoint).

Otherwise, you can use classics such as Bain's Chess Tactics for students or Seïrawan's Winning chess tactics.

Then, a good exercise would be to go through some classic games and try to identify the opponent's tactical threats on every move.

I have it and read the first chapters, it made sense, his cd prior to the book was better, more simply and structured, these others I have not read. I have CT_Art 3.0 by convekta, also.

:)

Well, then you just need to drill these patterns with CT-Art and don't forget to add 'What can my opponent do ?' to your thought process and you're home !

Now, is blitz the best way to do this ? Probably not. Try something much longer so that you have time to identify your opponent's threats. If you can't, then the time control is probably too fast.

actually i dont have a problem seeing the tactics, i have a problem seeing the tactics when under pressure or in a small time frame like the tactics trainer, i may turn off the timer and just do the tactics, visualising the variation to the end without the pressure of the clock.

Is this the thought process that you use, you look at the square that you are prepared to move your piece to and then immediately subject it to falsification by asking, what can my opponent do if my piece goes to that square?