Rating difference across time controls • page 1/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

I expect it's quite common.
I see that I'm slightly above average at bullet and blitz and apparently somewhat better at rapid and classical.
I'm wondering whether I just can't cope with little time or is it that the pool of players playing shorter time controls is on average stronger? Has this been analysed or do people have a general impression of whether it might be true?

I expect it's quite common. I see that I'm slightly above average at bullet and blitz and apparently somewhat better at rapid and classical. I'm wondering whether I just can't cope with little time or is it that the pool of players playing shorter time controls is on average stronger? Has this been analysed or do people have a general impression of whether it might be true?

annoygenius

#2

@a3224 I think people play more blitz and bullet than longer time controls

MuldrothaEDH

#3

annoygenuis is correct in general but also it depends if you can see 50/50 moves very very fast or if you can see very very good moves much slower

Ihavenothing

#4

But there a weirder inconsistencies. When you look at games of puzzles, you see a 2000 player managed to pull of a not so obvious tactic in a 10 minute game, were as i saw a 2200 player in yearly rapid try to fish for a tactic like a 1500 player.

Tae7

#5

I think the general ( including some titled players) rating trend is -100/200 and in some cases even -300+ as you go down the time control. Classical rating>rapid>blitz>bullet.(Just my observation)
E.g 1600 rapid players are unlikely to have the same blitz rating and some 1900 classical players have a rapid rating of 1700.You have to be experienced in longer time controls first before getting a better rating in blitz/bullet as obviously less time to think results in more blunders etc.

I think the general ( including some titled players) rating trend is -100/200 and in some cases even -300+ as you go down the time control. Classical rating>rapid>blitz>bullet.(Just my observation) E.g 1600 rapid players are unlikely to have the same blitz rating and some 1900 classical players have a rapid rating of 1700.You have to be experienced in longer time controls first before getting a better rating in blitz/bullet as obviously less time to think results in more blunders etc.

Ihavenothing

#6

@Tae7 than why do some good bullet players have horrendous otb games?

Tae7

#7

#6 That’s true
I was only talking about lichess ratings not otb related. Imo bullet is 60% speed, 40% thinking so its understandable that some players whom only play bullet can’t play other time controls well.

#6 That’s true I was only talking about lichess ratings not otb related. Imo bullet is 60% speed, 40% thinking so its understandable that some players whom only play bullet can’t play other time controls well.

Ihavenothing edited

#8

@Tae7 or why do fms have higher bullet rating than gms. Sure it might be 1 factor. But im sure its not the whole story. Ok, didn't see your answer

Tae7

#9

@Ihavenothing There are exceptions ofc. However, take a look at the top 200 bullet players.How many of them are FMs?

dude202 edited

#10

i think its because of cheaters......its hard to play against a computer program with only 2 minites to use to think ....certainly cheaters play blitz and rapid but a lot of the computer chess games can be beaten if you have time to think.....