Puzzles doesn’t mean speed, sometimes people will take awhile on puzzles to fully calculate, that’s what they do. I play puzzle rush for fun and it warms up the brain, so if I see some tactics that aren’t too difficult I can spot them immediately than see if they actually work in the position
this thing accepts Canadian quarters that’s nice, got 12 1/2 extra comments if needed which I hope I won’t
they don't bear repeating.
We can agree on that.
Look at the above post. That kid now 15 year old Gm Elect and his coach also tells him to do tons of puzzles and speed chess. Chess has gotten much more advanced over the years and we have all these online tools and tailored training regiments. Its not the 1940s anymore.
Nearly every strong player (and weak player) enjoys blitz. What does that have to do with the main point:
Coaches say to play long games, and you disagree without a good reason.
Did people say not to play long games? At least, that wasn’t MY point. I think that playing long games is important, but it’s certainly not the only way to improve.
Oh, well if it isn’t interesting for you than just say it like that, from what I read it seemed like you were trying to say classical isn’t as valid as blitz
have a good day and enjoy your flagging
they don't bear repeating.
We can agree on that.
Look at the above post. That kid now 15 year old Gm Elect and his coach also tells him to do tons of puzzles and speed chess. Chess has gotten much more advanced over the years and we have all these online tools and tailored training regiments. Its not the 1940s anymore.
What would you know about chess improvement?! 😂😂😂😆😆😆
On a serious note, it really doesn't matter if you play blitz or classical. By playing and practicing in the right way, anyone can get better regardless of the time control. It's stupid to discriminate skill levels based on time control. Some people get good playing classical tournaments. Some people get good playing online blitz games. They can both reach the same skill level with enough work.
Did people say not to play long games? At least, that wasn’t MY point. I think that playing long games is important, but it’s certainly not the only way to improve.
Coolout says a few argumentative and silly things.
For one he claims his opponent's argument is any amount of speed chess is bad, which no one has argued.
Secondly he claims there's no need for long games at all.
they don't bear repeating.
We can agree on that.
Look at the above post. That kid now 15 year old Gm Elect and his coach also tells him to do tons of puzzles and speed chess. Chess has gotten much more advanced over the years and we have all these online tools and tailored training regiments. Its not the 1940s anymore.
Nearly every strong player (and weak player) enjoys blitz. What does that have to do with the main point:
Coaches say to play long games, and you disagree without a good reason.
I can just repeat the opposite points back to you. Coaches also say to do puzzles and play fast games.
And why are my reasons not good? Can you point one out and explain? I'm not saying it wouldn't help, I'm simply saying one is not necessarily better then the other.
The burden of argument is on the person challenging the experts.
I don't disagree with conventional wisdom.
I'm sure @TacticalPrecision would love this!
Yes to this. The deluded, slow thinking, stare-at-the-board players who imagine they are really "deep" even though they end up making the same move a bullet player makes in 2 seconds, THEY ARE PATHETIC. Chess is a game of warfare where the element of time is very real. Without it, it's just a computer program.
All the chess masters of old were pathetic for thinking deeply?
Without the element of time, chess is just a computer program?
At some point you must mention our reptilian overlords.
Wait, no need for long games at all? There’s plenty need!!!! I don’t know if your just trying to argue with a bunch of people or you actually believe that, but either way I respectfully disagree to the fullest extent
I don’t know if your just trying to argue with a bunch of people
Let me stop you right there.
Yes, that's what he's doing. It's also what he's known for.
Didn’t know that, ok I leave now since it isn’t serious
can I have 13 cents back in change .-.
Didn’t know that, ok I leave now since it isn’t serious
can I have 13 cents back in change .-.
Yeah, too bad isn't it 
Wait, no need for long games at all? There’s plenty need!!!! I don’t know if your just trying to argue with a bunch of people or you actually believe that, but either way I respectfully disagree to the fullest extent
I absolutely believe that. We see it with the age of online chess. with the new and upcoming chess players. With myself personally. Even with the sentiments of the pros and commentators who are trying to move the sport forward to become more popular by general society. You got very skilled players on this website who rarely if ever play classical. I think it was Naroditzky who said during the SCC championship that he has watched the evolution of chess online and 5 min blitz is the new rapid lol. Classical is only necessary if being good at classical is your aspiration.
Ok get past 700 and maybe someone will believe you 😆 😆 😆
if your focus is just on winning then sure, play by intuition & keep flagging scrubs... if you'd rather improve your skills, leaving enough time to make educated decisions between your candidate moves is helpful:
big difference between 3/0 & 3/2. 🙂
Isn’t the only difference that there’s no dirty flagging?
Isn’t the only difference that there’s no dirty flagging?
+2 involves fairly different evaluation IMO. For example if my endgame is winning, and I need 20 moves to queen a pawn plus another 5 to win all their pieces so I can premove the mate, then I can't do it if I have 10 seconds and no increment... but it would be easy to do with +2 increment.
So it changes how positions are evaluated. With no increment I can even have good winning chances after blundering (not sacrificing, but blundering) a full knight if it's my 60 seconds vs their 30 seconds in an unclear position. But with increment a small but permanent disadvantage like a bad pawn structure with no real counterplay might ultimately lose me the game.
If you took more than half an hour to play your first game yeah it’s classical XD
And the title is rather insulting given the huge amount of people who play classical, myself included. No one has learned how to play chess with a clock rapidly ticking down right next to them during their first game, most probably did it on a board with a friend teaching or through online tutorials, and practicing with something that sounds reasonable to someone new to chess. When I play blitz I always end up in some wacky situations which you wouldn’t quite get, like being up a whole queen! But down to one second on the clock and no time to take all your opponents remaining pieces. Is that really skill? Your full potential, losing a queen up?! Your full potential is what you can do with a long period of time and make the absolute best possible moves your able to, not trying to flag or taking a piece hoping your opponent pre moved something else. While it’s fun it isn’t bringing your best self on the chess board. There’s my $0.02 CAD on the subject
classical has a clock too. All sports come down to a buzzer and it is that pressure that causes people to make wacky moves. And yes time management is absolutely a skill and comes with experience. Flagging your opponent is a valid strategy. IN fact you could argue speed chess is more complicated because of the added strategy of just trying to confuse your opponent to waste his time rather then always playing the correct line.
Yes classical has a clock, but it’s a significantly longer one, and flagging isn’t generally perceived as much skill as a mouse and lag issues come into play a lot there, and trying to waste an opponents time instead of playing the right move doesn’t exercise the same calculation part of chess as longer time controls do. My one question for you is have you played in a long tc otb tournament ? If not then maybe stay away from trying to argue one is better than the other until you’ve played otb
darn this is really getting into my pockets cuz I don’t carry coins around, here’s another $0.02 CAD vending machine