All right there are three theories:
1. blitz hurts your game.
2. blitz helps your game
3. blitz has no effect on your game.
I enjoy playing blitz as well as at RHP. I figure one counteracts the effects of the other (if any). It may be the way you play blitz could influence its effects. Some people play blitz the way fat people eat chocolates, popping them in one after another. A lot of times, when i'm beaten i'll check the opening on a database to see where i went wrong or go over the game in fritz to see where i blew it. I am absolutely amazed how many tactical shots i miss in blitz using this system. Pieces and pawns hanging everywhere and i don't spot them. So the first thing i do on the move is scan the board for a second to check for hanging pawns or pieces. This doesn't happen much otb lately. Then comes forks, other types of double attacks, king safety, etc. If all this examined carefully before moves, you are lots less likely to make game-ruining moves. I believe these are becoming rarer in my otb because of this. Someone may have a less flattering opinion of blitz. Anybody else care to chime in? Incidentally, i just read a recommendation on a website for serious players to stop playing blitz while they study the game. On the other hand, i've noticed the top players are also the top players in blitz. Comments?
At a lecture, GM Susan Polgar said blitz, if played 5 minutes or slower, and in moderation, helps your tactical ability and your ability to play in time pressure. However, most people suggest only play about 1 or 2 blitz games for every 10 regular games you play because blitz teaches you to move the pieces quickly while regular chess teaches you how to move the pieces.
Originally posted by buddy2I like blitz for learning new opennings because of time pressure people stick to what they know fairly well. And if you go against the same opponent sometimes you'll get 10-15 games in the same openning in a row, which helps you figure out weaknesses patterns and such.
All right there are three theories:
1. blitz hurts your game.
2. blitz helps your game
3. blitz has no effect on your game.
I enjoy playing blitz as well as at RHP. I figure one counteracts the effects of the other (if any). It may be the way you play blitz could influence its effects. Some people play blitz the way fat people eat chocolates ...[text shortened]... the other hand, i've noticed the top players are also the top players in blitz. Comments?
HOWEVER, if you are a player who consistently hangs pieces i would say blitz is not for you. When you've come to the point that you do not easily give up a piece in a slow game then you can play fast and not worry so much (it becomes second nature and you won't drop as many pieces). I say this because games where pieces are hanging every few moves can not rightly be called chess.
I think Blitz and slow games (i.e 1hr) and then some corr. can actually enhance on another.
simply because each has there own and unique demands.
but to put in a very simple formula : speed/depth.
if you ever get into time trouble in slow games your blitz skill maybe what saves you. - meanwhile playing slow and corr. games in the first place should be developing good habbits of actually looking deep and far into a position in the first place.
adding to that Blitz can be very good for getting a "feel" for an opening, or just trying something new in general, simply because if it sucks you have only wasted 5 min (compared to an hour slow game)
playing an opening 10-20 times gives you an idea as to where the games head (open, closed, tatical stratgecial, etc ,etc)
EDIT: TYPO's
I think Blitz can enhance tactical vision, openings etc. But you don't get any new positional understanding from it.
What I learned most from is to analyse a position for very long (over many days). Also, analysing grandmaster games helps (even without descriptions). I think if you want to get better play, deep-training is much better.