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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 25 Nov '07 14:54
    Does anyone share the pain of finding blitz chess very very disheartening? Personally I find it very difficult to even keep up with my adversaries at all... is this a factor of playing skill/rating? I find that I just about always lose quite badly even to ppl with a similar to slightly worse rating than me... what's the secret?!
  2. 25 Nov '07 15:31
    Originally posted by rijnsburger
    Does anyone share the pain of finding blitz chess very very disheartening? Personally I find it very difficult to even keep up with my adversaries at all... is this a factor of playing skill/rating? I find that I just about always lose quite badly even to ppl with a similar to slightly worse rating than me... what's the secret?!
    First time i played a 10 minute game i sucked, it takes a bit of practice. Now 10 minutes is almost a luxurious amount of time to think, 5 is seems comfy. Yes, ability to play well at fast time settings is a good indicator of playing skill and your general aptititude for the game.
  3. 25 Nov '07 16:05
    I think I have no aptitude whatsoever then heheh let's hope practice works
  4. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    25 Nov '07 17:14
    I'm really bad at blitz. I can hardly break 1300 FICS on a good day, and just yesterday I dipped even to 1100's for a while on ICC. still, I'm relatively good at tactics, and I do understand something about the game. I just can't do it fast enough. I need the time to think things through, but there isn't any in blitz.

    my guess is blitz works purely on experience, which I have very little. and because I'm so bad at it, it doesn't really encourage me to train blitz, so I stay bad. it's a vicious circle.

    I wonder how many other 'good' slow players but lousy blitzers we have here? I suspect there might be quite a lot of us, but most people just are not comfortable talking about it.
  5. 25 Nov '07 17:27
    Originally posted by wormwood
    I'm really bad at blitz. I can hardly break 1300 FICS on a good day, and just yesterday I dipped even to 1100's for a while on ICC. still, I'm relatively good at tactics, and I do understand something about the game. I just can't do it fast enough. I need the time to think things through, but there isn't any in blitz.

    my guess is blitz works purel ...[text shortened]... might be quite a lot of us, but most people just are not comfortable talking about it.
    Well I dont feel so bad about it when players with skyhigh ratings (from my perspective) can own up to it as well heheh... it's a fun way to pass the time while you wait for the other guy to move though
  6. 25 Nov '07 17:33
    I struggle greatly with blitz. 1150 on Uchess. I will have a won game in front of me but I simply haven't the time to play it out. Almost always lose on timeouts.
  7. 25 Nov '07 17:38
    so we have identified some "blitziclly challenged" players... what tips do the blitz gods have for the mere mortals? or if ure not a blitz god, what's the word around the campfire wrt being a good blitz player?
  8. 25 Nov '07 19:28
    Originally posted by rijnsburger
    so we have identified some "blitziclly challenged" players... what tips do the blitz gods have for the mere mortals? or if ure not a blitz god, what's the word around the campfire wrt being a good blitz player?
    I am definitely no "blitz god" but I can give some tips which I hope will help. Blitz is all about seeing small tactics- 8 move combos don't matter in Blitz- two move combos do. Blitz is also more about what is the most difficult move in the position vs. what is the best. For example, let's say I have two possible moves, one that is the best or one that is the most dangerous looking. I would choose the latter- the whole point is to force my opponent to burn up time trying to stop it, or at least worrying about it. That's why I tend to play gambits in blitz- my opponents just knaw through their time and I win on a timeout- it seems cheap to be sure, but that's how blitz works
  9. Standard member ivan2908
    SelfProclaimedTitler
    25 Nov '07 21:51
    Originally posted by chesskid001
    I am definitely no "blitz god" but I can give some tips which I hope will help. Blitz is all about seeing small tactics- 8 move combos don't matter in Blitz- two move combos do. Blitz is also more about what is the most difficult move in the position vs. what is the best. For example, let's say I have two possible moves, one that is the best or one that ...[text shortened]... h their time and I win on a timeout- it seems cheap to be sure, but that's how blitz works
    I played at 1650 FICS standard and 1200 blitz. I didn't play a while and now I am 990 blitz. It really sucks.

    Note that 1200 FICS on 5 minute blitz thinks better than 1200 RHP, 3 day per move
  10. 25 Nov '07 22:01
    I play blizt better than I play cc chess...I don't know what it is maybe I play what first comes to mind and that is better than the move I would have come up with, with more time.
  11. 25 Nov '07 22:08 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ivan2908
    I played at 1650 FICS standard and 1200 blitz. I didn't play a while and now I am 990 blitz. It really sucks.

    Note that 1200 FICS on 5 minute blitz thinks better than 1200 RHP, 3 day per move
    However, the comparison is misleading and says nothing about RHP novices relative to established FICS blitz players -- as your own FICS ratings for standard vs. blitz chess show.

    Typically, a player's blitz ratings are considerably lower than his standard or cc chess ratings; if your standard FICS rating was 1650 and 1200 blitz (before it fell), then for reference against your own chess skills you ought to be comparing RHP players rated 1600-1700 since there are no blitz ratings at RHP. All else being equal, an established rating of 1200 at blitz will indicate considerably greater chess skills than a 1200 rating at standard chess -- and this should be true independent of venue.

    (The question of differing ratings systems is yet to be addressed vis a vis FICS; I have just pointed out in a different thread that on ICC, for example, the ratings system is "graded on a curve": points are added to keep the average rating there at 1600, not 1200.)

    Also, I suggest that conclusions about which "thinks better" are inference rather than deduction, since a competent blitz player depends much more strongly on memorized lines than a chess newbie.
  12. Standard member ivan2908
    SelfProclaimedTitler
    25 Nov '07 22:27
    Originally posted by Mark Adkins
    However, the comparison is misleading and says nothing about RHP novices relative to established FICS blitz players -- as your own FICS ratings for standard vs. blitz chess show.

    Typically, a player's blitz ratings are considerably lower than his standard or cc chess ratings; if your standard FICS rating was 1650 and 1200 blitz (before it fell), the ...[text shortened]... a competent blitz player depends much more strongly on memorized lines than a chess newbie.
    Of course my assumption and comparsion beetween FICS 1200 and RHP was completely approximative. In addition time controls are so different, you can barely call this the same game. Chess game which lastes 10 minutes or two months is not the same... An what is interesting I can vary here on performance more then on blitz. It depende of patience. You can gain or lose 300 points on RHP only by your approach, taking your time or not, scanning your blunders or not etc..

    So two players with similar blitz skills can have one for example 1400 RHP, second 1700. Too many variables for generalizing anything

  13. 25 Nov '07 23:45
    Originally posted by chesskid001
    I am definitely no "blitz god" but I can give some tips which I hope will help. Blitz is all about seeing small tactics- 8 move combos don't matter in Blitz- two move combos do. Blitz is also more about what is the most difficult move in the position vs. what is the best. For example, let's say I have two possible moves, one that is the best or one that ...[text shortened]... h their time and I win on a timeout- it seems cheap to be sure, but that's how blitz works
    I've been playing blitz for over twenty years, and you've pretty much summarized accurately what it takes to win at blitz, IMO.
  14. 26 Nov '07 00:06 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by ivan2908
    ...And what is interesting I can vary here on performance more then on blitz. It depende of patience. You can gain or lose 300 points on RHP only by your approach, taking your time or not, scanning your blunders or not etc...
    I think that's a very important point. If a blitz player is competent it is generally by virtue of a great deal of experience, so that many moves come second nature to him. That in turn generally suggests a background which, given more time for analysis, would give him a rating hundreds of points higher than his blitz rating.

    A player without that depth of experience might, with patient application, play competently at standard or correspondence chess, but wouldn't necessarily be able to transfer that competence to a blitz setting because his board sense and thus his choice of moves isn't second nature yet.

    I'm really still learning the game myself. All of the openings I am playing here, I have only started playing since I came here. My use of opening databases helps me both to compensate for my ignorance and, over time -- many, many more games than I have played here -- will give me a decent understanding of the lines I play (where it is understood that "decent understanding" implies a solid sense of typical middlegame strategies and endgame goals). But it isn't something I can transfer to blitz or even standard chess. Of course, my opponents here are also free to use opening databases, and so theoretically any advantage I might gain thus is offset by their own.

    My approach to chess is to attempt to learn to play well first -- something I am still aspiring to. Given this, and enough experience doing so, my board sense and knowledge of the game will then be such that I can move much faster without sacrificing general competence. But speed in and of itself (of the type seen in blitz games) isn't (for me) seductive; I'd be quite happy playing very, very well at standard tournament OTB time controls; being able to do so while taking on average just 1 minute per move would be superb, and represents the limits of any aspirations I have regarding speed.
  15. 26 Nov '07 06:13 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by wormwood
    I'm really bad at blitz. I can hardly break 1300 FICS on a good day, and just yesterday I dipped even to 1100's for a while on ICC. still, I'm relatively good at tactics, and I do understand something about the game. I just can't do it fast enough. I need the time to think things through, but there isn't any in blitz.

    my guess is blitz works purel might be quite a lot of us, but most people just are not comfortable talking about it.
    Have you tried quicker time settings than you are used to? You have to train yourself to think quickly.