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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member clandarkfire
    Grammar Nazi
    08 Feb '08 05:57 / 1 edit
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, and am shocked how many players above 1600 have no idea what to do without them. I can hardly manage to be 1300 on correspondence, but in OTB and blitz I can beat many players up to 1700. Is the margine really so large?
  2. 08 Feb '08 06:16
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, and am shocked how many players above 1600 have no idea what to do without them. I can hardly manage to be 1300 on correspondence, but in OTB and blitz I can beat many players up to 1700. Is the margine really so large?
    well, if you are telling the truth about your OTB rating then no the margin isn't that big...you are just a stronger player than them.
  3. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    08 Feb '08 11:51
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, and am shocked how many players above 1600 have no idea what to do without them. I can hardly manage to be 1300 on correspondence, but in OTB and blitz I can beat many players up to 1700. Is the margine really so large?
    well, you kind of said it yourself: the kind of chess you play in 1600 blitz has got you to only 1200 here. it's just way too inaccurate to survive in CC.
  4. Standard member Ramned
    The Rams
    08 Feb '08 13:22
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, and am shocked how many players above 1600 have no idea what to do without them. I can hardly manage to be 1300 on correspondence, but in OTB and blitz I can beat many players up to 1700. Is the margine really so large?
    these are two totally different schemes, that's why. In correspondence, 1 e4 is much more common than OTB. So playing 1 c4 may throw correspondence players off. Also correspondence players such as myself are used to having time to look over moves. In otb it is harder to spot long term attacks.
  5. 08 Feb '08 13:57
    Originally posted by Ramned
    these are two totally different schemes, that's why. In correspondence, 1 e4 is much more common than OTB. So playing 1 c4 may throw correspondence players off. Also correspondence players such as myself are used to having time to look over moves. In otb it is harder to spot long term attacks.
    I have got to question your statistics. I don't think e4 is any more or less common in correspondence than OTB, and I don't think it matters. They salient point is that in correspondence you have exponentially more time than you do OTB. Therefor ill-advised moves which may have a threat to them are less likely to generate the hoped for result in correspondence. Ergo, you need to play more precise chess. The level of your competition is another variable and finally, a 1200 at one place is not necessarily equal to a 1200 somewhere else. Ratings can only be used as a guide of relative strength within their own rating pool.
  6. 08 Feb '08 17:51 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, ....
    Neither blitz nor correspondence chess is "irrelevant". It is a hobby for most of us and as long as you enjoy yourself that's all that matters.
  7. Standard member ivan2908
    SelfProclaimedTitler
    08 Feb '08 20:33
    Originally posted by clandarkfire
    I find it strange how huge the difference between correspondece and blitz is here. Sure, people will say blitz is completely irrelevent, but I for one never look up opening databases or anything, and am shocked how many players above 1600 have no idea what to do without them. I can hardly manage to be 1300 on correspondence, but in OTB and blitz I can beat many players up to 1700. Is the margine really so large?
    A few of strong players use their engines to play correspodence instead themselves. So 1200 player gets to 2000 CC and then 1300 player crushes him in blitz because he do not have time for consultation in blitz. Of course correlation between Blitz chess and CC chess is very loose but not THAT loose that you will be CC expert and Blitz patzer.
  8. 08 Feb '08 23:38 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ivan2908
    A few of strong players use their engines to play correspodence instead themselves. So 1200 player gets to 2000 CC and then 1300 player crushes him in blitz because he do not have time for consultation in blitz. Of course correlation between Blitz chess and CC chess is very loose but not THAT loose that you will be CC expert and Blitz patzer.
    Yeah it is...at one point I was losing to players in the 1000 range at 5min chess when I was 1800 at 30min chess but now I am beating 1700-1900 players.

    EDIT: on a different site. chesshere.com to be exact
  9. Standard member Ramned
    The Rams
    09 Feb '08 03:02
    Originally posted by zebano
    I have got to question your statistics. I don't think e4 is any more or less common in correspondence than OTB, and I don't think it matters. They salient point is that in correspondence you have exponentially more time than you do OTB. Therefor ill-advised moves which may have a threat to them are less likely to generate the hoped for result in correspondenc ...[text shortened]... e else. Ratings can only be used as a guide of relative strength within their own rating pool.
    What I mean is, at master play, more masters would play openings other than e4 - less positional. In correspondence, e4 is more common because one cannot play gambits as easily and successfully as in OTB since opponents can figure a refutation more successfully in cc. For example, the Fried Liver attack is excellent (in my opinion) in OTB against the unprepared opponent. But in cc, it is not successful against the unprepared opponent who can analyze and become prepared.
  10. 09 Feb '08 06:59
    Originally posted by Ramned
    What I mean is, at master play, more masters would play openings other than e4 - less positional. In correspondence, e4 is more common because one cannot play gambits as easily and successfully as in OTB since opponents can figure a refutation more successfully in cc. For example, the Fried Liver attack is excellent (in my opinion) in OTB against the unprepar ...[text shortened]... in cc, it is not successful against the unprepared opponent who can analyze and become prepared.
    Depending on the strength of play getting "prepared" in-game does not work because the chances are that the side that played the fried liver knows
    the positions that arise in the middle game and endgame much better than the other guy.
  11. Standard member clandarkfire
    Grammar Nazi
    09 Feb '08 17:22
    Well thanks everyone, and like I said I am around 1600 OTB. I guess the difference may have a lot to do with the fact that until a few weeks ago I had 100+ games in progress, but now I'm cutting down. The fact that I dont usually use databases probably has something to do with it aswell.