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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Subscriber ogb
    27 Jul '17 17:55
    So do OTB players think on-line correspondence players are a bunch of pansies that need days and days to figure out a move? and are very much weaker players OTB ?
  2. 27 Jul '17 18:50
    I think that depends on how you calculate. If you use chess boards to calculate, then that could have a negative effect on your otb.

    If you use data bases and other aids as you play that could attificially improve your play when compared to otb.

    If you play like me in a knee jerk manner in cc and otb then you are just as bad either way.

    But chess is chess so you can learn in either way when someone shows you a novelty that is quite known but new to you.
  3. 28 Jul '17 14:07
    I reckon most if not all OTB players dabble with internet chess.
    Most will play blitz some will do what we do and play longer games.
    I do both except my OTB play is down to a few leagues games a season
    played purely for the social side. An excuse for a good night out and a beer or two....

    From reading other comments on other sites a lot of regular OTB players
    are put off playing longer games by the use of computers and have admitted
    they might find the urge to use one to strong.

    I'm sure they don't think of correspondence players as pansies.
  4. 28 Jul '17 16:05
    Originally posted by @greenpawn34
    I reckon most if not all OTB players dabble with internet chess.
    Most will play blitz some will do what we do and play longer games.
    I do both except my OTB play is down to a few leagues games a season
    played purely for the social side. An excuse for a good night out and a beer or two....

    From reading other comments on other sites a lot of regular ...[text shortened]... he urge to use one to strong.

    I'm sure they don't think of correspondence players as pansies.
    Those who would not use computers could be put off by the assumption other players would.
  5. 30 Jul '17 10:03
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Those who would not use computers could be put off by the assumption other players would.
    That's only really an issue at the 2,200 level and upwards. Below that, anyone using a computer is doing it very badly.

    I have found that over-reliance on the analysis board here has negatively impacted my OTB play, so I now force myself to do the analysis without it, and then check it using the board. It takes longer, but is good practice for calculating.

    I've also found RHP to be good for learning openings.
  6. 31 Jul '17 17:34
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Those who would not use computers could be put off by the assumption other players would.
    Then they should take a long, hard look at themselves.
  7. 31 Jul '17 17:58
    Originally posted by @shallow-blue
    Then they should take a long, hard look at themselves.
    I've seen multiple complaints about it in this forum.
  8. 31 Jul '17 20:45 / 1 edit
    OTB players are green berets and fields operatives; corr. players are analysts or chiefs as George Smiley.
    The first can benefit of corr. play in a certain degree, but the others cannot benefit from OTB play. It would have been same as put old George Smiley in octagon ring for ultimate fight against a martial art fighter.
  9. 31 Jul '17 22:08
    I believe Purdy was more of a Correspondance guy and often had time trouble otb.

    The Purdy method spends much time taking reconnaissance.
  10. 01 Aug '17 14:25
    Originally posted by @ogb
    So do OTB players think on-line correspondence players are a bunch of pansies that need days and days to figure out a move? and are very much weaker players OTB ?
    I've heard this before from OTB players myself, what these short sighted people fail to understand is correspondence players simply choose to play under different time controls, and in more comfortable environments, this had no bearing on playing strength. In addition, correspondence players have proven their skills are at least as good as OTB players and that correspondence rating is roughly equal to an OTB rating.
  11. 01 Aug '17 15:01
    I think some also take pride in speed, which would also explain the rise in the popularity of blitz.
  12. 01 Aug '17 19:00
    Originally posted by @eladar
    I've seen multiple complaints about it in this forum.
    So have I, and I stand by my statement: those complainants need to take a long, hard look at themselves.
  13. 01 Aug '17 19:01
    Originally posted by @eladar
    I think some also take pride in speed, which would also explain the rise in the popularity of blitz.
    They might, but they're wrong to. As in cricket and love-making, a quicker game is not necessarily better in chess.
  14. Subscriber ogb
    01 Aug '17 20:00
    Originally posted by @vandervelde
    OTB players are green berets and fields operatives; corr. players are analysts or chiefs as George Smiley.
    The first can benefit of corr. play in a certain degree, but the others cannot benefit from OTB play. It would have been same as put old George Smiley in octagon ring for ultimate fight against a martial art fighter.
    good analogy..
  15. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    04 Aug '17 14:57
    Originally posted by @ogb
    So do OTB players think on-line correspondence players are a bunch of pansies that need days and days to figure out a move? and are very much weaker players OTB ?
    My OTB play is about 200 points higher than here. I think it is because I typically play much
    faster than I should here. I never spend days on any move, more like seconds.