Once I was playing a rapid game (15+5) with a kid, he was good in my opinion, but I was beating him in this game. He claimed for a draw, I declined and said, "I think I am gonna win this, so I would like to decline your draw request. ;)" He continued claiming for a draw on every move. I was clearly winning so I rejected it. But soon enough he said, he was not good in slower game, so asked me to finish this one and play blitz. I agreed. We started playing blitz then. To my surprise, he was really fast and accurate, I could not beat him that time.
So, does it mean a person can be good in blitz but not in slower game? If yes, then which player is considered better - the one who plays blitz better or the one who plays rapid/classical better?
Blitz and even more bullet, hyperbullet are more about intuition and dexterity and strong nerves and cheap tactics.
Rapid and even more classical and even more correspondence are about strategy, patience, stamina.
I wouldn't say "good at blitz, bad at classical" but some people are definitely better at one or the other. Some players seem to do better when they have time to think and others seem better under time pressure.
I have heard claims that, generally speaking, players should have a higher blitz rating than classical and that players who are higher rated at slower controls are 'suspect' because of the increased liklihood that that they use engine assistance. While it's true that it's easier to cheat at slower time controls, those kinds of accusations are usually full of shit. Some people are simply better when they have more time to think.
I know someone who is good in very quick games only.
Hello... it is an interesting question! I seem to be better the longer the time control is... Especially bullet 2+1 seems to be hard to me, I guess I don't get the increment...
I think that it has to do with the fact that one of my strengths is calculation... Maybe to see that a move is good, I have to look 3-4 moves ahead, whereas other people might be able to dismiss it on general principles, like, "That move cedes control of this central square, so it can't be good". The ability to look at 5 moves ahead, and see a tactical nuance deep into a line is basically worth zero in short time controls. But in chess, sometimes you HAVE to look 5, 10 or even more moves ahead to be able to determine if a move is good or bad.
I would guess that beginners tend to be better at longer time controls- we might be able to see that a move is bad, but we can't do it quickly! That's for masters! But I'm afraid that my supposition does not hold true, many people are indeed better at short time controls.
I would rather be good at classical than at bullet... I like classical more... patience is important in classical, and stamina... if you get tired after 30 minutes you will start playing much worse... that kind of fight appeals to me, personally... But others love speed, Alireza Firouzja says he likes bullet more for example...
And in classical you can't really say, "Well, I lost because I hung a piece, but oh well, I had 5 seconds on my clock, what can you do?".
A classical game is a game in which you are both going to be playing better than you would be playing in bullet... it's your best version versus the other person's best version. Stakes are high! You have a chance to use a lot of your knowledge. You can give it all. You bring your best weapons to the battlefield! So an epic battle must ensue. It's a life or death situation. You will be battling each other for a long time. I like that! It's all or nothing. Both players offer each other a true shot, a chance, to prove themselves. If you won me when I was at my best, then truly I will take my hat off to you!
I think that you have to be brave to play a long game, because losing will hurt more. You invested more into the game. I like the idea of risking my ego. I think it's important to know how to lose, and to be faced with your imperfections, basically! We must all know that we're not perfect. But if you are upset at losing, it is only because this game matters to you. You're going to suffer because of love... And if you are able to love, then it must mean that you are on the right track!
What you play most of often you perform best in. If you’re relying on intuition and pattern recognition with some flagging potential then blitz/bullet is better suited for you, whereas if you rely on calculating and deep exploration for best moves available and minimizing errors, longer time is better suited. It’s possible to excel in one and not the other.
-Jordan
I remember a site called chesscube which was full of kids playing 1min chess and thinking they were chessmasters because they had a 1min rating of 2300 lol
They couldnt even cope with a 3min game after playing 1min for so long...