Blitz material mercy rule

Hello,

I've been thinking about this idea for some time. Since blitz chess mistakes are inevitable due to time limitations (even at higher levels of play), it's a rather nasty version of chess for making great ideas. It becomes more instinct driven. For example, I'm rated 1800 in 24 hour chess on chess.com, but rated 1200-1300 there for blitz. Quite a disparity, and clearly shows my lack of experience to draw on. This means if I have time to calculate, coordinate, etc. that I play much better.

In blitz on this site, I'm rated roughly the same. However, often (way more often) I find myself getting a huge material advantage somewhere around +9/+10, but have had many games where I either run out of time or accidentally end up in a stalemate due to time. Given enough time, there's no way an opponent is returning from that. So I wonder why we wouldn't reward better decision making with a blitz mercy rule. Wouldn't this bring back better motivated decisions under the time limit, and reward better play without having too much time to think?

As the famous Bobby Fischer once said "Blitz chess kills your ideas". I think adding a mercy rule, would make it so you have time for at least a few excellent ideas. Thoughts?

I like to flag people with just 1 pawn versus a queen and half an army. Serious dude??!

I'm afraid I don't know what "flag people" means...dude. But I should also mention, that with a huge material advantage at an actual tournament, most people would resign.

One of the funny parts of blitz chess is... well, that it is a blitz. There's merit in being smart at "flagging" your opponent (making their time run out before they get to checkmate you).

Since attaining the huge material advantage you mention took you more time to think.... it seems reasonable that being ahead on time is a legitimate advantage on the part of your opponent, it means they administered better their clock, and maybe sacrificed a bit of thinking time in order to get there.

Don't see how your idea would improve anything - much rather the opposite.

what is blitz mercy rule?

shakki-mestari123 it would mean that you automatically win if you have a huge material advantage (say 10+).

WanoBanano I would argue the improvement is to start favoring better play over time management. My personal gripe with blitz is that bad play can win games due to time, and then circling back to Bobby Fischer's quote on how that really isn't good chess.

It seems you don't like the very principle of blitz chess. Time-sensitive decisions (and mistakes) is at the core of blitz.

If i am at a big disavantadge (let's a Queen down), I can still fight by making my opponent lose time, for example by sacrificing some pieces to check him/her or by playing weird moves that will make my opponent scary of not stalemating me.

Of course, these moves would be terrible if time was not so tight. But this is blitz, and making your opponent lose time can be good strategy. Your suggestion would kill the very goal of blitz I'm afraid.

and I don't disagree with Bobby Fischer quote. I think Blitz chess and 1h30x2 chess are very different in what makes a good move.

Don't you think your opponents would have showed "better decision making" if they had used time as much as you did?
How, in principle, would "getting a +10 advantage for win" within say 5 minutes differ from normal 10 min rapid game?

Anyway, one option for you might be playing with increment. 2 sec per move helps a lot in time trouble and helps to avoid lots of "clear win but lost because of time" situations.