11 Nov 11
1 edit
I cannot understand it, without any care for the principles of chess players do the
craziest of things, they ignore development, they make crazy pawn moves up the side
of the board, the play their bishops where they can be kicked away next move, they
ignore development and push five pawns in a row, they have no concept of strategy,
they are materialists and play for cheap tricks and the most annoying thing ever is that
they win! How can that be? surely if there is any justice they should be punished? but
noooo, silly attacks are all the rage, i dunno anything, but i know i suck at blitz. every
time i do a Nimzoveitch, dance upon the table and scream, why must i lose to this idiot!
12 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWatch good blitz players play good blitz. Imbalance is the key to both clock and board initiative when there is no time.
I cannot understand it, without any care for the principles of chess players do the
craziest of things, they ignore development, they make crazy pawn moves up the side
of the board, the play their bishops where they can be kicked away next move, they
ignore development and push five pawns in a row, they have no concept of strategy,
they are m ...[text shortened]... every
time i do a Nimzoveitch, dance upon the table and scream, why must i lose to this idiot!
Q
12 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSuggestion: learn from the losses.
I cannot understand it, without any care for the principles of chess players do the
craziest of things, they ignore development, they make crazy pawn moves up the side
of the board, the play their bishops where they can be kicked away next move, they
ignore development and push five pawns in a row, they have no concept of strategy,
they are m ...[text shortened]... every
time i do a Nimzoveitch, dance upon the table and scream, why must i lose to this idiot!
Go over the games with a fine-toothed comb and see what went wrong. If their attack was really unsound, there ought to be a refutation. Sometimes the answer is countering a flank attack with a blow in the center. If you are ahead in development, opening the center may prove very effective. Sometimes the answer is taking the sacrificed material and then weathering the storm. Sometimes you return the sacrificed material [some, or all of it] to kill their attack. Sometimes the answer is delaying castling. If they start a pawn storm prematurely, castle on the other side of the board. And sometimes the answer is starting a 'silly attack' of your own! Again, if you are ahead in development, your attack may prove more effective.
12 Nov 11
Originally posted by SwissGambitthis is great advice also, when one is under time pressure the tendency can be simply
Suggestion: learn from the losses.
Go over the games with a fine-toothed comb and see what went wrong. If their attack was really unsound, there ought to be a refutation. Sometimes the answer is countering a flank attack with a blow in the center. If you are ahead in development, opening the center may prove very effective. Sometimes the answer is tak ...[text shortened]... ck' of your own! Again, if you are ahead in development, your attack may prove more effective.
to look for moves rather than gather ones thoughts as to the strategic elements in the
position, thus I end up forgetting about the broader picture, thanks SG
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt difficult for many players to make the transition from the slow pace of correspondince chess to the blitz game. I've found that (like many other things), more time spent with blitz will cause you to improve. The only question is: Is blitz worth spending time on??
I cannot understand it, without any care for the principles of chess players do the
craziest of things, they ignore development, they make crazy pawn moves up the side
of the board, the play their bishops where they can be kicked away next move, they
ignore development and push five pawns in a row, they have no concept of strategy,
they are m ...[text shortened]... every
time i do a Nimzoveitch, dance upon the table and scream, why must i lose to this idiot!
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by bill718yes i think it is Bill, CC is the art of analysis, where as blitz is the art of playing me
It difficult for many players to make the transition from the slow pace of correspondince chess to the blitz game. I've found that (like many other things), more time spent with blitz will cause you to improve. The only question is: Is blitz worth spending time on??
thinks. What it really comes down to though, is i am just an adrenalin junkie!
13 Nov 11
2 edits
Originally posted by bill718I started up playing strictly CC, and blitz has helped me quite a bit. they complement each other. CC is great for many things, but as the games last for months and years you tend to lose sight of the big picture. the games become disjointed separate studies (in your head) instead of one single continuous games where everything affects everything. also blitz forces you to focus on basics and practical things, as you simply don't have time for sorting out complex structures. no matter how 'correct' that complex idea might be.
It difficult for many players to make the transition from the slow pace of correspondince chess to the blitz game. I've found that (like many other things), more time spent with blitz will cause you to improve. The only question is: Is blitz worth spending time on??
13 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI do enjoy Rapidplay O.T.B. for the adenaline, the difference I feel is that quickplay being more instinctive. Swiss gambit makes a notable point about peice imbalance a fantastic element to wrong footing your oponent.
yes i think it is Bill, CC is the art of analysis, where as blitz is the art of playing me
thinks. What it really comes down to though, is i am just an adrenalin junkie!
14 Nov 11
Originally posted by Hells Caretakeryes there's nothing quite like it 🙂
I do enjoy Rapidplay O.T.B. for the adenaline, the difference I feel is that quickplay being more instinctive. Swiss gambit makes a notable point about peice imbalance a fantastic element to wrong footing your oponent.
14 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodblitz forces you to focus on basics and practical things,
I started up playing strictly CC, and blitz has helped me quite a bit. they complement each other. CC is great for many things, but as the games last for months and years you tend to lose sight of the big picture. the games become disjointed separate studies (in your head) instead of one single continuous games where everything affects everything. also blit time for sorting out complex structures. no matter how 'correct' that complex idea might be.
yes this is an excellent observation, too many times our minds are filled with too much
knowledge and it clouds our vision, we make elaborate plans and far reaching strategic
schemes only to forget about the immediate practicalities. Chess can be complicated
enough without us making it more so me thinks.
14 Nov 11
Blitz is bad chess. It is much more like coin flip chess than CC because you simply don't have time to see where certain moves might end up.
Sometimes I totally suck at blitz and sometimes I rock! Or of course it could be that sometimes my opponent sucks, but it sure makes me look like I rock! 😀