standard rating is inflated. Make your current rating -200 then you have real rating. They boosted the standard ratings... Better in chess=better in blitz
Why I suck at blitz chess
Sort:
Because probably you are not used to fast chess, standard reveals your chess skills. But blitz doesn't, it just indicates how well you perform under time pressure. Good luck!
Blitz chess isn't as bad as people say it is. A strong blitz player will be strong at regular chess, and vice versa. Sure, some people are slightly stronger at one, but you won't see a 2000 blitz player playing 1200 long time control, or vice versa.
Also, I'm pretty sure on this website, the ratings are roughly standard across time controls, I'm guessing because the bots play at similar strength regardless of time control. So if you're playing at 1400 level strength and complexity at a 30 minute game on chess.com, someone who's 1400 in 5-minute blitz is playing equally strong despite their 5 minute control. Which means that 1400 5-minute player will likely trounce you if you had equal time control.
I've been devoting myself strictly to rasing my lowly blitz rating and after a year of wasted effort, finally hit upon the way to get it up. Sounds simple, but it's all about pattern recognition. Moreso than calculation. You gotta be able to recognize the quick-kills and tactical misses instantly.
I'm only 1300 now, but when I plug my games into engines, the tactical errors from both sides aren't as egregious as hanging pieces or 1-move tactics.
The ONLY thing that worked for me was to study tactics, and restudy simple tactics I was missing. I started another thread on it today - check it out - I used to be blitz blunderfest as well for 2 years before I figure out how to get it together by studying tactics CORRECTLY.
hhnngg1 sorry to tell you but everything you just said is wrong.
hhnngg1 wrote:
Blitz chess isn't as bad as people say it is. A strong blitz player will be strong at regular chess, and vice versa. Sure, some people are slightly stronger at one, but you won't see a 2000 blitz player playing 1200 long time control, or vice versa.
I used to be much "better" at blitz before I realized what a complete joke it all was. When I started playing blitz putting proper thought into it I find I can't play the same way anymore, because blitz requires focus on tactics and nothing else. I didn't have much real clue of actual chess, and what I did know of strategy etc. was never used.
You may enjoy seeing the numbers go up and down and the quick feedback. However you are not playing the actual game of chess, it's ALL snap tactics and pushing for time. "Strategy" in blitz involves crazy little tricks to make the fastest moves yourself while keeping your pieces safe from tactics and waste the opponent's time. Little kids playing against their siblings are playing chess more and better than you because they're taking their time.
Sure there's a correlation, but to say "slightly stronger at one or the other" is totally false. Look at any pool of rating players across different time limits and they'll all be HUGELY different. Sure, Nakamura (who is known for blitz) will be number 1 or 2 and there'll be other GMs at the top. But they're likely not super GMs. There's a loose correlation, that's all. And I've often seen IMs with blitz ratings of 1700s or 1800s here, mostly because of how cheap many people on this site are.
hhnngg1 wrote:
Also, I'm pretty sure on this website, the ratings are roughly standard across time controls, I'm guessing because the bots play at similar strength regardless of time control. So if you're playing at 1400 level strength and complexity at a 30 minute game on chess.com, someone who's 1400 in 5-minute blitz is playing equally strong despite their 5 minute control. Which means that 1400 5-minute player will likely trounce you if you had equal time control.
Nope, there's no "standardization" of the rating at all. If that were the case then along with your previous point according to you everyone should have the same blitz and standard rating.
I've been devoting myself strictly to rasing my lowly blitz rating and after a year of wasted effort, finally hit upon the way to get it up. Sounds simple, but it's all about pattern recognition. Moreso than calculation. You gotta be able to recognize the quick-kills and tactical misses instantly.
I'm only 1300 now, but when I plug my games into engines, the tactical errors from both sides aren't as egregious as hanging pieces or 1-move tactics.
The ONLY thing that worked for me was to study tactics, and restudy simple tactics I was missing. I started another thread on it today - check it out - I used to be blitz blunderfest as well for 2 years before I figure out how to get it together by studying tactics CORRECTLY.
Of course basic tactics matter when all you're doing is playing blitz. Even GMs struggle with tactics sometimes in blitz. You're learning next to nothing about the proper game of chess. I know it can be hard to resist just playing blitz games, but you are wasting your time playing them and I should know with the amount I've been addicted to them.
Totally disagree with you uhohspaghettio.
Sure, at my lowly level, games are decided mostly on tactics.
But watch a NM like chessnetwork play 5 min blitz on his video streams - there's a LOT more than just simple tactics at work there.
And I definitely disagree with you on the rating schema you propose. A 1200 proven 5-minute blitz player is definitely stronger than a 1200 player who has that rating only on 30 minute games here.
And despite the reality that chess is more than tactics, the reality is that even in long games, the majority of class-level wins are decided - by tactics.
Okay, you know better. Override everything I just stated.
Your words weren't wasted on me, Uhoh.
Jan 23, 2015
0
#9
Improve you chess understanding. Accumulate chess patterns and you will be a better blitz player. Improve your long games and it will also improve your blizt game.
jambyvedar2 wrote:
Improve you chess understanding. Accumulate chess patterns and you will be a better blitz player. Improve your long games and it will also improve your blizt game.
Problem is that I am solid rated at standard chess (about 1700), and at blitz I am 1280 temporally. Rating difference is 400 points !!!
yes crime, thats because u are overrated in standard
They boosted standard ratings by a lot, 1700 standard can easily be a 1350-1400 in blitz.
yes thats what I mean...
IMO the online chess stats seem inflated. Usually when someone has a high online chess rating their live rating is garbage and like 400 points lower.
Jan 28, 2015
0
#15
goingforyourqueen wrote:
Say that if it makes you feel better...
IMO the online chess stats seem inflated. Usually when someone has a high online chess rating their live rating is garbage and like 400 points lower.
look at my online rating lol
Jan 28, 2015
0
#17
In blitz I went from 580 (!) to 900 (exclam) with two months of playing. Now in slow chess I make all my moves in 15 seconds or less and I have forgotten every positional concept I ever knew. I'm not sure my metioric rise was worth it.
There's a huge difference between there being a loose relation between blitz, live and online and there being some sort of interaction or link between them.
If you play blitz every day you are VERY unlikely to improve your standard or online chess in any way. Sort of like a phd student trying to improve their math by doing multiplication tables.
not really, its possible
I do not understand why people who are usually much worse from me in standard chess often win me in blitz. What is the point ? I know that blitz chess isnt the real chess actually, because there are many blunders, but I simply wonder why am I so bad in blitz ? I suppose my blitz rating should be solid according to my standard rating ? Any suggestions how to improve my blitz chess ? Thanke you guys.