I was just curious as to how much relative these two are to eachother, cuz i see a lot of 2300+ bullet players with pretty low classical rating considering, same as the opposite, high rated classicals pretty low on bullet.
Personally im about 2100 in true classical, but in bullet i stink.. so i guess besides above question, id like to hear some advice on how to pass 2000 in bullet.
This suggests, really: How can a player have 2200+ classics and a bullet in 1700? The difference is huge and suspicious.
You have to be fast and accurate with the mouse to be good at bullet. And care. And try. Not all good players do all of those things. To me, there's nothing suspicious about it.
The crazy thing is trying to draw any conclusions at all using a bullet rating as a data point.
Personally, if I ever am playing a bullet game, I'm probably also on the phone and maybe worse.
There is nothing suspicious. A good player in long time controls can be a bad player in bullet.
i didnt mean it was suspicious :( i was just in need of advice on bullet
anyway lol at this
http://nb.lichess.org/Jj0UoDGc/whiteUsually players who are good in tactics are good bullet players... But also you must have a completely repertory of openings to not waste your time in the first fase of the game.
Believe it or not, people can be both good at chess and slow.
Believe it or not, many people (FOOLS!) start playing this game not because they like the crazy action of berserking the bullet arena but because they like taking their time and playing with a softer pace. Being patient will make you a better classical player but a worse bullet player.
Just wanted to say, as a mod of this site, that #3 is correct.
We don't, and never will, draw any conclusion by using a bullet - classical rating gap as a data point.
thanks for your replies
pardon my ignorance but does this mean classical and bullet are irrelative ?
personally i dislike 1 thing about bullet its when players pass moves just to win on time
#8
It does not make sense to compare bullet rating (aka as casino chess imho) to classical rating.
What's more. Several times simuls by masters have been given here with the masters having 1500? as classical rating.
They don't even bother to play classical, the only thing they like to do is play bullet.
Which makes some sense, esp. for profi chess players.
Work hard in a tourney, and then play bullet for fun and adrenaline level increase.
And with bullet a new game is started soon, and one can play loads of bullet games in 1 hour compared to e.g. 10 0 or 15 10 classical games.
I tend to go with the path in the middle : blitz ! :)
Bullet chess is much too much for this old man here.
As a further note on the subject, I very much have a process I go through each turn. My initial "instinct" moves are often terrible. After I assess the position, threats, etc., my candidate moves are reasonable and I cull from there. This probably has something to do with learning as an adult instead of as a child, but whatever the reason, I'm currently old and slow with terrible instincts. I know I'll never be an even decent bullet player, but the kicker is I don't really enjoy it either, so I don't care.