lichess.org
Donate

Why do the top rated players who use this site mostly play bullet and blitz games?

@Roper300 While I don't disagree completely with some of your points, I have some objections to make:

1. Analysing Blitz isn't neceserally dumb. Of course, with way less time to think than a classical game, blunders occur way more often, but that doesn't mean that there are no noteworthy positions to analyse, like some endgames, or some sacrifices that seemed good or bad at first sight. I for example (not that I'm any good at this game whatsoever) tend to watch some of my games when I'm done, going back to search some interesting positions that came up, trying to memorise them so if something similar poped up in the future, I would be more familiar with it.

2. Yes, Blitz is really convenient. Many people don't get the chance to participate in RL tournaments so they end up playing more online. Now, most sites do have classical games, but there are many flaws with it. First of all, cheaters. It's the easiest thing to cheat in such games, and even if the cheater does end up being caught, you would have already spent hours on a game that was to be aborted. Second of all, there's a pretty high chance you would end up being bored. While in a RL tournament, you will get to look around other games, distract your mind just enough so you don't get bored to the point that you can no longer continue playing and, well, there's a huge difference between seeing your opponent across you, the pieces, the board rather than staring at your computer...

Of course, classical games have way more to offer in most aspects, you cannot dump the importance of Blitz and Rapid games... then again, that's just me...
@Bill_Likes_Chess
If you had the chance to play a game against Carlsen, would you?
On line chess is a blessing. You can play with players from all over the world. As is always the case with all good things , we humans always find a way to destroy them. When you encounter a cheater you focus on yourself.When you play a classical game on the net you play to improve so there is no waste of time. You focus on what went wrong in your game and you try to identify your weaknesses. If you play to verify your ego , then yes , play blitz only.
@Roper300 Yes, encountering cheaters is a waste of time, if you play a game only mid-way and spent 2 hours to do so, that's a complete waste of time, especially if the position has absolutely nothing to offer
@piscatorox
No, learning chess is not different for the simple reason that the way the brain develops skills has remained EXACTLY THE SAME.
Developing skills doesn't change with technology and we are far from evolving the human brain.
Here is an example. More than 100 years ago Capablanca said:

"In order to improve your game you must study the endgame before everything else; for, whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middlegame and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame."

Today cognitive scientists believe that chess is better learned from the simple to the complicated(the improving spiral theory) and they practically agree with Capablanca.

Another example, today in conservatoires students learn music as Mozart did more than 300 years ago. In gyms, free weights are still considered the best way to improve your strength.

Technology improves but the body and the brain are the same. You guys like to think that you have more advanced brains than Capablanca. Well , I have bad news for you. You don't!
@Bill_Likes_Chess
If there is one thing chessplayers are simply unparalleled is excuses.

Chess players will say anything in order to play blitz and avoid hard work. For you it's cheaters , some will claim they have an evolved brain ,others will talk about nameless GMs that did this or that. This is a war I can't win, I very well know that, but this is a war I don't try to win.

I am only try to give people a different perspective from the usual "nothing is wrong with blitz" and yes, that's a huge nonsense. There are good players and trainers that believe blitz has ABSOLUTELY NO INSTRUCTIVE VALUE. We have GMs , world champions and trainers that created GMs and world champions that say that.
Are they are all wrong? What are the chances?
Imo you are mixing up some things in this thread by merging several questions in one:

1) Why are top players (or let's say GM+ or even IM+) playing blitz/bullet

2) Is blitz a better way to improve compared to classical games?

1) is fairly simple

a) there are less cheaters
b) the games are (likely) more fun, people aren't always going for the optimal improvement path. Also it is harder (on average) to keep focused for longer periods online compared to OTB, especially knowing you are playing somebody way inferior.
c) they could test some things fairly quickly + anonymous
d) they don't waste as much time playing a 30+30 game vs some patzer who doesn't know anything about chess (and might even cheat).
e) due to a-d) the pools in blitz+bullet are much stronger on every single site, so the effect is enhanced.

2) is way harder to answer:

I would personally somewhat strongly disagree on the "classical games are less important than blitz" comment for most of us (let alone bullet). Speaking about random people around 1700ish.. or...2000ish or 2200ish FIDE. Might be different for 2500+, I don't know.

I'd actually say:

bullet: bad or neutral (once you get a basic understanding of the game)
blitz: very slight positive (very good for not regressing during a longer period w/o classical games but with some negative sides as well)
blitz combined with other trainings methods (opening study, quick analysis) : slight-medium positive
classical games OTB with no prep / study : medium positive
classical games with prep etc. : large positive

BUT:.. there are huge time constraints for most of us + some prefer blitz for fun, so...

the 2) point might be controversial, so feel free to prove me wrong (doesn't have a lot to do with the top players playing bullet though ;-))
@ProfDrHack
I didn't. Did I play blitz? More than anyone. Starting Friday night in the chess club(or in a friend's house) and ending Saturday morning(and not early the morning)! My posts are not about claiming that I am better. That was never the point. I am as lazy as everybody else(if not much more).
But at least I don't disregard great players and trainers just to claim that "I was training" when all I did was having fun(and what a fun that damn thing is)!
@Roper:

As I see it, the difference now between blitz now and then is that nowadays online blitz comes with a free super-Carlsen that kibitzes your games and tells you afterwards what you should have done. If you had a GM watching your blitz games and giving you commentary afterwards I bet you would have found it very useful.

I would be interested if you can find similar comments about blitz (to your ones from Dvoretsky etc) from those who have grown up in the era of the internet with engines that are stronger than the world champion. Certainly players get much stronger much younger now than they used to, and (IMO) part of that is the ubiquitous availability of sites such as this one; I don't think the strongest young players today play significantly more classical games than those of 30 years ago, but they do get better and achieve GM titles etc at much younger ages.

And also, since it hasn't been mentioned, time scrambles are a familiar feature of classical chess and have been since clocks were introduced. For this aspect of classical chess, blitz is highly specific training (indeed probably the best training).

Certainly blitz isn't the only component to improving - its like an athlete training one muscle only - but to me it seems a clear net positive.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.