Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 29 Nov '06 10:34
    Is it just me or is it a lot harder to get a high blitz rating. For example, I'm 1800-1850 standard on ICC and only 1500-1550 Blitz. Part of the reason for this is that a lot of subtle strategy I have time to employ in standard games is not possible in blitz. Thus, a lot of positional details that I can leverage in standard are replaced by simple moves designed to limit blunders. In fact, it is exactly in tactics that I fail most miserably in blitz. What is your experience? Is a blitz rating harder to achieve for you?

    BTW: I'm not saying that I think blitz ratings are as meaningful as standard ratings, but I do think that they're harder to obtain.
  2. 29 Nov '06 11:31
    I've thought about this now and then but haven't ever seen a perfect explanation.

    I even made soma statistics from FICS:

    At that time there were 840 players with a blitz rating (avg 1441) and 685 with a standard rating (avg 1708). These figures are by no means accurate concerning all the FICS players but at least they visualize the phenomena.

    14% of standard ratings were over 2000, only 5% of blitz ratings were as high. 95% of standard and 70% of blitz ratings were over 1300.

    59% of standard ratings were between 1501-1899. 52% of blitz ratings were between 1201-1599.

    Loony theories:

    1. Better players play blitz, slower games is purely for weak amateurs. [Although this is true to some extent (many good blitz players don't have a standard rating at all) it doesn't address the question.]

    2. It is easier to use computer assistance in longer games - if there is a huge difference in ratings it only goes to show that the player in question is a cheater. [Even if computers played all standard games it hardly explains why the ratings are different.]

    Plausible theories:

    1. Difference in the two pools is caused by new players joining the server. When they first start to play games their rating drops below their actual strength (new interface, adjusting to time controls). However, after initial drop they start gaining points from other players and thus contribute to the inflation. Playing longer games doesn't take that much adjusting and thus the rating reflects players’ actual strength better early on. [This sounds like a sensible explanation, especially on ICC where players have a provisional rating for the first 20 games before actually entering the rating pool.]

    2. The clearest difference in the two pools is the number of games played. Standard games take longer to finish and there are fewer active players in the standard pool. The reason why the inflation is more noticeable in the blitz pool is due to the number of played games.

    Regards,

    - bahus
  3. 29 Nov '06 11:53
    My blitz is higher than my slow. My blitz right now is 1810 but I don't think my slow is that good.
  4. Standard member onyx2006
    onyx2007
    29 Nov '06 11:55
    my blitz is woeful, I won't even say... I generally move quite quickly here and my ratings around 1600, I don't really like blitz though. Too fast and I miss too much opportunities.
  5. 29 Nov '06 13:23
    Originally posted by exigentsky
    Is it just me or is it a lot harder to get a high blitz rating. For example, I'm 1800-1850 standard on ICC and only 1500-1550 Blitz. Part of the reason for this is that a lot of subtle strategy I have time to employ in standard games is not possible in blitz. Thus, a lot of positional details that I can leverage in standard are replaced by simple moves de ...[text shortened]... ratings are as meaningful as standard ratings, but I do think that they're harder to obtain.
    Don't forget that your opponent also has limited subtle strategy in blitz, so it is down to where you have had the most practice. A correspondence player who hasn't had much practice at blitz wouldn't be as good at blitz, and vice versa.

    I have observed that as I get better at correspondence, my blitz play has gradually been improving. I figure it is because in correspondence, you have more practice at looking deeper into the position. Therefore end up spotting these patterns better.

    Naturally you still need to practice blitz before you see the benefit though. You have to get used to seeing it all in your head, rather than playing through the moves through "Analyse Board" or on a separate board.
  6. 29 Nov '06 16:58
    I mentiioned this in another thread: My rating here is around 1900. In blitz (FICS) (ICC) (PLAYCHESS) I'm around 1500. My otb uscf is 1800+. I'm not sure why there's such a big difference. Maybe it has something to do with age: faster games give younger players a bigger edge, slower games not so much.
  7. 30 Nov '06 22:50 / 2 edits
    When my RHP rating was around 1100-1300 I used to play on FICS also and I would play blitz and regular but my regular FICS rating was around 1300 where as my blitz rating was around 900 (YIKES) anyway, I know why this is... in my case anyway. When I have more time to move I am able to take my time with analyzing the position in my head and I can figure out the best move instead of looking for patterns (I was new to the game when I played blitz) and when I played blitz I didn't have time to do this, I had to rely on my memory of book lines and when it wasn't a book line I had known I would basically try my best and hope to god it was the right move... alot of the time I would time out anyway.

    So I stopped playing blitz and since not many people liked long games on FICS I decided to commit myself to correspondance chess which fit my schedule alot better. Now my RHP rating is 1500+ and I have improved alot... this is mainly because I like to take my time with my moves and study the position and the lines I am playing.

    When you take your time to move it pays off. There are not so many great blitz players because you have to rely on your memory of book lines and pattern recognition instead of visualizing the possibilities which takes alot more time.
  8. 01 Dec '06 00:52
    i can't blitz for beans
  9. 01 Dec '06 18:14
    normal: 1990
    blitz: 2060
  10. 01 Dec '06 22:36
    I've generally noticed that blitz ratings generally tend to be 100 to 150 points below regular ratings, though there are exceptions. For example, my regular is 1245 but my blitz is 1136, although only 2 months ago, my regular was 1183 and my blitz was 1002.
  11. Standard member HomerJSimpson
    Renouned Grob Killer
    01 Dec '06 22:40
    Originally posted by chesskid001
    I've generally noticed that blitz ratings generally tend to be 100 to 150 points below regular ratings, though there are exceptions. For example, my regular is 1245 but my blitz is 1136, although only 2 months ago, my regular was 1183 and my blitz was 1002.
    I think your rating is really higher than that
  12. 02 Dec '06 06:29
    Strange! It seems the average blitz rating on ICC is actually HIGHER than the average standard rating. (only by 15 points) So much for my theory. I guess I'm just better at standard chess.
  13. 02 Dec '06 21:05
    Originally posted by Falco Lombardi
    My blitz is higher than my slow. My blitz right now is 1810 but I don't think my slow is that good.
    I've had a 1700-1800 blitz rating on Yahoo without using a computer or every cheating. On standard, I'm around 1600. So, I'm better at blitz in the long run. I'm good at eating someone's clock up when there's only 3 minutes on the timer.