I think he meant by the experience we will have in the game, playing OTB. Correspondence doesn’t have the psychological factor, it doesn’t have the pressure to be in front of the opponent and of course, you can consult books (not to mention those using the engine ..). Quick Games and Blitz also involve analysis and strategy, but the shorter the time, the more superficial it will be, so not everyone who says that bullet is not chess (I don't agree with that), is not always just being an asshole with you, the Sometimes just considering that there is almost no calculation in bullet, the game revolves much more about dynamism and recognizing patterns
#21
Who gets to determine where this line is where “real chess” starts and ends? is 5 minute blitz real chess? Does it determine truly the skill of the player? How about 8 minute rapid? 3|2 blitz? 5|1? 10 minute game? Is that real chess? Does that determine skill level? 15 minute? 25? 30? Who gets to decide this?
Or perhaps it’s ALL real normal chess with simply different time control and it’s all pattern recognition, just that some of you are faster and some are slower :)
It’s the same people that are best at fast chess as in classical, as Grischuk said.
What is this talk of “real chess skill”???
Real chess skill is determined by one and ONLY one factor: does it say you won or does the screen say you lost the game, that is the ONLY real chess skill. It’s called winning or losing. If you lost you had less skill than you opponent in that game, end of story. If you won you had more skill. Is there luck? Sure. And there is luck in classical too. Is there time scrambles? Sure, and there are time scrambles in classical. Is there more calculation in classical and more pattern recognition in bullet? Yes, but those BOTH are chess skills.
Who gets to determine where this line is where “real chess” starts and ends? is 5 minute blitz real chess? Does it determine truly the skill of the player? How about 8 minute rapid? 3|2 blitz? 5|1? 10 minute game? Is that real chess? Does that determine skill level? 15 minute? 25? 30? Who gets to decide this?
Or perhaps it’s ALL real normal chess with simply different time control and it’s all pattern recognition, just that some of you are faster and some are slower :)
It’s the same people that are best at fast chess as in classical, as Grischuk said.
What is this talk of “real chess skill”???
Real chess skill is determined by one and ONLY one factor: does it say you won or does the screen say you lost the game, that is the ONLY real chess skill. It’s called winning or losing. If you lost you had less skill than you opponent in that game, end of story. If you won you had more skill. Is there luck? Sure. And there is luck in classical too. Is there time scrambles? Sure, and there are time scrambles in classical. Is there more calculation in classical and more pattern recognition in bullet? Yes, but those BOTH are chess skills.
Did you read the part I said that is not my opinion? I was just trying to understand the argument together with you ... Calm down hehe
@Kusokosla
In my opinion the strong player is the player, who is good at chess overall. Some players are good at bullet/blitz not because they are strong players but because they "play clock", play unsound hyper-aggressive openings, use their mouse really fast and etc.
So longer time controls especially OTB classical/rapid are way more revealing in that aspect. That's because one can't rely only on clock (as many do when they play 1+0 or even 3+0 time controls), can't make a lot of unsound sacrifices and etc.
In my opinion the strong player is the player, who is good at chess overall. Some players are good at bullet/blitz not because they are strong players but because they "play clock", play unsound hyper-aggressive openings, use their mouse really fast and etc.
So longer time controls especially OTB classical/rapid are way more revealing in that aspect. That's because one can't rely only on clock (as many do when they play 1+0 or even 3+0 time controls), can't make a lot of unsound sacrifices and etc.
#24
In OTB slow time control games you STILL HAVE TO BEAT YOUR OPPONENT BEFORE THE CLOCK RUNS OUT lol
Come on guys. No matter how long the game is, you are limited by the clock as to how deeply you can calculate and how deeply you can think about the position. It’s very common to have terrible time scrambles in very slow classical games, just ask Grischuk.
Clock is a part of the intellectual side of the game, yes, because you must use your intellect WITHIN THE ALLOWED TIME.
I can just as easily make a claim that only blitz is real chess since if you can’t use pattern recognition quickly it means you don’t know the subject well enough. If it takes you 5 seconds to see a backrank mate and it takes me 1 second I am better at chess than you. It doesn’t matter how many books your read or how good you THINK you are.
Where I would agree that you guys have a point is 1 minute bullet with no increment and faster than that time controls. There indeed internet connection, mouse speed or finger speed on iPad begin to play a serious role. But given time control of let’s say 5|3 there is simply no way anyone can claim that it’s not real chess and involves clock bashing and speed, no it does NOT! Any slow old handicapped person can still make a move every 3 seconds even if it’s their first ever time using a computer.
Let’s say someone plays an unsound gambit or a quick opening sequence to gain time on the clock. Ok. But how is that not chess skill??? Shouldn’t you use your chess skill now to punish this behavior? It should be easier for you to win now because opponent played unsound sacrifice or an opening that offers him no advantage. Or perhaps you can’t refute it quickly? But that’s YOUR fault, not your gambler opponent’s. Tal played this way too, his stuff was unsound, but it took long analysis after the game to find the refutation.
Or let’s say someone played that long opening sequence to gain time on the clock. You may say that’s cheap bullet trick, but wait! This is called opening preparation! It’s up to YOU now to refute it or match that level of speed and preparation. Don’t blame the opponent, don’t accuse him of being a cheap player. that’s not fair.
In OTB slow time control games you STILL HAVE TO BEAT YOUR OPPONENT BEFORE THE CLOCK RUNS OUT lol
Come on guys. No matter how long the game is, you are limited by the clock as to how deeply you can calculate and how deeply you can think about the position. It’s very common to have terrible time scrambles in very slow classical games, just ask Grischuk.
Clock is a part of the intellectual side of the game, yes, because you must use your intellect WITHIN THE ALLOWED TIME.
I can just as easily make a claim that only blitz is real chess since if you can’t use pattern recognition quickly it means you don’t know the subject well enough. If it takes you 5 seconds to see a backrank mate and it takes me 1 second I am better at chess than you. It doesn’t matter how many books your read or how good you THINK you are.
Where I would agree that you guys have a point is 1 minute bullet with no increment and faster than that time controls. There indeed internet connection, mouse speed or finger speed on iPad begin to play a serious role. But given time control of let’s say 5|3 there is simply no way anyone can claim that it’s not real chess and involves clock bashing and speed, no it does NOT! Any slow old handicapped person can still make a move every 3 seconds even if it’s their first ever time using a computer.
Let’s say someone plays an unsound gambit or a quick opening sequence to gain time on the clock. Ok. But how is that not chess skill??? Shouldn’t you use your chess skill now to punish this behavior? It should be easier for you to win now because opponent played unsound sacrifice or an opening that offers him no advantage. Or perhaps you can’t refute it quickly? But that’s YOUR fault, not your gambler opponent’s. Tal played this way too, his stuff was unsound, but it took long analysis after the game to find the refutation.
Or let’s say someone played that long opening sequence to gain time on the clock. You may say that’s cheap bullet trick, but wait! This is called opening preparation! It’s up to YOU now to refute it or match that level of speed and preparation. Don’t blame the opponent, don’t accuse him of being a cheap player. that’s not fair.
@Kusokosla
I think that classical games are more demanding. They require the ability to calculate deeply, the deep knowledge of openings (in blitz you can afford to play unsound openings or just any developing moves, but in classical game against a strong opponent you usually can't), the understanding of chess strategy and the ability to create long-term plans.
I think that classical games are more demanding. They require the ability to calculate deeply, the deep knowledge of openings (in blitz you can afford to play unsound openings or just any developing moves, but in classical game against a strong opponent you usually can't), the understanding of chess strategy and the ability to create long-term plans.
#26
I find faster time controls much harder. Being an adult beginner I’m slow and have no tactics, so I do much much better if I have a few minutes per move, but my first bullet experience was hilarious, I realized that I have no chess skills at all, thou I was playing comfortably and on even terms it’s good score in slower games VS 1900s OTB in semi casual games.
Slow players are like ESL English students, at first we learned to speak so slowly, and could carry a fine conversation given lots of time! But then when someone speaks really quickly, some native speaker, we would not understand him at all, it’s too fast. But that means our English was bad! It doesn’t mean that our conversation partner needs to speak slower so we can impress him with our English, no! It means our English isn’t good enough.
I find faster time controls much harder. Being an adult beginner I’m slow and have no tactics, so I do much much better if I have a few minutes per move, but my first bullet experience was hilarious, I realized that I have no chess skills at all, thou I was playing comfortably and on even terms it’s good score in slower games VS 1900s OTB in semi casual games.
Slow players are like ESL English students, at first we learned to speak so slowly, and could carry a fine conversation given lots of time! But then when someone speaks really quickly, some native speaker, we would not understand him at all, it’s too fast. But that means our English was bad! It doesn’t mean that our conversation partner needs to speak slower so we can impress him with our English, no! It means our English isn’t good enough.
@Kusokosla Thanks for saying this! I also have the same feeling!
@KalabukhovDaniil also have a valid point. Long game requires more understanding of the game.
I think longer games can help us to improve and understand the logic of every move.
Thanks and have a nice day.
@KalabukhovDaniil also have a valid point. Long game requires more understanding of the game.
I think longer games can help us to improve and understand the logic of every move.
Thanks and have a nice day.
I mean you can can win Bullet/Blitz by time or by sensible chess. Just play fast, anything, it works. The outcome might the same but in longer time-controls and otb it is shifted to „chess“. The Bullet trickery is no good for that.
But I believe in you, even you can manage 1400 in rapid! @Kusokosla The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
But I believe in you, even you can manage 1400 in rapid! @Kusokosla The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
@Kusokosla Hard to say how good you are. Better than me for sure but that alone aint much. You seem to play on 3 minute games which far from chess being played on your average weekend tournament. Probably you would do well but right now impossible to say.
With plenty of time it thing change. You see possible plan on 3 minutes chess then you do it unless it is tactically not viable. In otb you woudl look for another plan regardless. Also opening fro blitz are different. At least on good ones. Things like London system, kings indian attack come to value. And openings like catalonian do perform nearly as well as in slow chess.
So in sense it is very different. Just an shadow of slow chess. Entertaining still, very much so
And slow chess is ther real chess. Chess is supposed to be thinking game. And thingking takes time
With plenty of time it thing change. You see possible plan on 3 minutes chess then you do it unless it is tactically not viable. In otb you woudl look for another plan regardless. Also opening fro blitz are different. At least on good ones. Things like London system, kings indian attack come to value. And openings like catalonian do perform nearly as well as in slow chess.
So in sense it is very different. Just an shadow of slow chess. Entertaining still, very much so
And slow chess is ther real chess. Chess is supposed to be thinking game. And thingking takes time
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.