I consider myself a chess beginner. About 2,000 games played on this account, 1120 ELO on Blitz and 1275 on Rapid.
My question probably depends on the player but... What do you think is the best way to learn, Blitz vs Rapid?
I like Rapid games because you have a lot of time to think about your moves, develop strategy and tactics within the game
But I also like Blitz because you play more games and experience more scenarios. For example I can play a lot more end games in Blitz then Rapid but in Rapid I have more time to think about the end game moves more technically.
So essentially is it better to play slow and think carefully or play lots of games and experience different situations for someone at my level?
I quite enjoy Rapid at the moment, so will probably continue with playing more Rapid games (With occasional Blitz / Bullet for fun), but just interested in thoughts...
PS. I think I need to work on my end game the most if that matters at all...
Me too but I like bullet games
Rapid of course, or even better classical.
You learn from your mistakes, so you should thoroughly analyse lost games.
Analysing blitz makes little sense as the analysis would take longer than the game itself.
In a blitz games most errors can be atributed to playing too fast.
In a rapid or classical game you at least had some time to make your mistake, so the mistake is more fundamental.
@tpr thank you, pretty much summarizes my thoughts...
Classical go all the way out to 15+15
Your on pace it took me 10000 games to hit 1800,then I stopped playing slow time controls and have gone nowhere in the last maybe 8000 games.
No no no
Both are fine. No Bullet!
Isn't it Glicko-2 though.
In addition to what tpr said above, I noticed that it's easier to remember mistakes made in a rapid game. Maybe because you were thinking longer about the move and so you remember your thought process that lead to the mistake. Or maybe because the brain has more time to memorize patterns this way. Whatever the reason, rapid is definitely more useful for learning.