I love these characters who say things like "I'm not good at blitz chess", with the implication being that they are quite accomplished and formidable at slow chess. The reality is, as painful as it may be for many of you to accept, that chess is chess. It makes no difference what the time controls are. If you can't play well at one time control, you most certainly cannot play well at any time control. The top players at slow chess are also always the top players at speed chess, even bullet.
Fischer was so good at bullet and blitz chess, that he would give massive time odds (usually his one and a half minutes to four and a half minutes for his opponent) to seasoned grandmasters and still win almost every game. Kasparov also won a great many blitz tournaments over the years, in addition to dominating the slow form of the game for nearly 20 years.
Just take a look at who the current champions are:
"Official" World Chess champion: Viswanathan Anand, who is also the former many time world rapid champion and has won his share of high level blitz events as well.
Number one ranked and rated player in the world: Magnus Carlsen, also placed number 2 in the world rapid final this year. The guy who won it, Sergey Karjakin, is currently at #7 in the world rankings in slow chess, and was actually #5 at the time he won the world rapid championship.
The #13 player in the world in slow chess, who has been as high as #7, Hikaru Nakamura, while not 'official', is understood to be the best online 1 min bullet player in the world as evidenced by his consistent topping of the bullet rating list at playchess.com.
And oh yeah, the winner of the 2012 blitz championship this year, Alexander Grischuk, also holds the record for the highest rating achieved on ICC, which was garnered from playing blitz chess there as well. By the way, he's #10 in the world ranking list for slow chess currently, and has been in the top 5. And in case you're wondering who came in second in that world blitz (five minute chess) tournament this year of 2012, it was the #1 ranked player in the world at slow chess, Magnus Carlsen.
This also applies exactly the same at the club levels. The highest rated players in slow chess typically win most of the blitz and rapid events as well. Chess is chess. Same pieces, same rules, same board, same time allotted for both players.
Originally posted by Cube EquityYou can't compare the top players to average joes... its apples and oranges. Pure tactical creativity will win you many blitz games at my level but if you play that way in a CC game you'll likely walk away with a loss.
I love these characters who say things like "I'm not good at blitz chess", with the implication being that they are quite accomplished and formidable at slow chess. The reality is, as painful as it may be for many of you to accept, that chess is chess. It makes no difference what the time controls are. If you can't play well at one time control, you most ...[text shortened]... ss is chess. Same pieces, same rules, same board, same time allotted for both players.
I suck at chess but I suck at bullet even more... I have a problem with decisiveness.
Originally posted by tomtom232Actually, yes, you most certainly can compare top players to club players in this respect. It's not apples and oranges at all. Chess is chess. The same dynamics that produce stronger players at the world class level, also apply at the club levels. Intelligence, competence, and skill are always important and are the factors that make up the difference in ratings at the club level. Unlike you, I'm speaking from experience, as a strong chess expert and seasoned tournament player who has played in various clubs around North America. The top rated players in slow chess mop up the blitz and rapid events almost every time. I've seen it over and over again.
You can't compare the top players to average joes... its apples and oranges. Pure tactical creativity will win you many blitz games at my level but if you play that way in a CC game you'll likely walk away with a loss.
I suck at chess but I suck at bullet even more... I have a problem with decisiveness.
The fact that you're going on about CC and can't even figure out on your own that CC isn't even real chess, as at the higher rating levels it always involves databases, tablebases, and engine consultation, further proves my point. There is a reason why weak players who aren't even grandmasters have often been 'world champion's' at CC. It's because CC is a joke. It's about having expensive computer hardware and getting good at using your software and running up your electric bill. Nothing more. If you are using it as a form of group theoretical study, or as a social medium, and you enjoy it, then more power to you. But if you're so dumb as to think that CC has anything at all to do with real competitive chess, then you're most certainly too clueless to ever have a chance at learning how to play real chess in the first place.
Originally posted by tomtom232And no offense, but players at your level don't win chess tournaments at any time control, whether it be bullet, blitz, active, or classical time controls. So your argument is quite moot.
You can't compare the top players to average joes... its apples and oranges. Pure tactical creativity will win you many blitz games at my level but if you play that way in a CC game you'll likely walk away with a loss.
I suck at chess but I suck at bullet even more... I have a problem with decisiveness.
Originally posted by Cube EquityThe implication is just "I'm better at slow chess", and not necessarily "I am formidable at slow chess". The flip side of your reality coin is that people who are not accustomed to very fast time controls, like G/5 or less, are pretty much helpless when they start playing at those time controls.
I love these characters who say things like "I'm not good at blitz chess", with the implication being that they are quite accomplished and formidable at slow chess. The reality is, as painful as it may be for many of you to accept, that chess is chess. It makes no difference what the time controls are. If you can't play well at one time control, you most ...[text shortened]... ss is chess. Same pieces, same rules, same board, same time allotted for both players.
Sometimes you are dealing with many years of a class B/A player never playing blitz. When they finally try it, they get routed by little kids rated 1200, because those kids can play a game in 5 minutes without panicking and reeling off a series of crude blunders.
I agree that those who suck at blitz should not sermonize about how it is based on luck, or not 'real chess', etc. The empirical evidence, as you have pointed out, weighs heavily against that theory. The top GM's dominate blitz chess as much as they do slow chess.
Originally posted by SwissGambitNo, the implication is that they don't suck at chess which is not blitz. The obvious use of hyperbole on my part was to illustrate a point. Of course things that are obvious to most, are not obvious to all.
The implication is just "I'm better at slow chess", and not necessarily "I am formidable at slow chess". The flip side of your reality coin is that people who are not accustomed to very fast time controls, like G/5 or less, are pretty much helpless when they start playing at those time controls.
Sometimes you are dealing with many years of a class B/A ly against that theory. The top GM's dominate blitz chess as much as they do slow chess.
First off, I have news for you. class B/A players suck. If that's your idea of a club heavyweight, you probably have never been a member of nor know anything about a nationally sanctioned chess club. I said the TOP players in slow chess at the club level also win the speed events, not the middling or slightly above middling level players. Enough with your proletariat straw-man rhetoric. Re-read my original post a few more times until this is clear to you.
Secondly, I don't see an A class player being 1200 in blitz. You're completely talking out of your ass here with wild nonsensical speculation. You're trying to find some one in a million anomaly where someone who has somehow made it to 1800-1999 in terms of a valid national rating in slow chess, has somehow never played any speed games (an animal I have yet to meet) and is flagging before the game ever gets started. If he was that stupid and couldn't manage his time to that extent, he never would have made it to A class in the first place, which, as I said earlier, is not a big deal anyway. More realistically, someone who is somewhere in the realm of A class, who hates speed chess and doesn't play it very often, could conceivably be as weak as say 1500-1600. Give him a couple of weeks of blitz practice and a change in attitude, and you'll find his blitz game matching his slow game in very short order.
Originally posted by Cube EquitySo do you believe if we play more blitz games we will improve on all our chess play?
No, the implication is that they don't suck at chess which is not blitz. The obvious use of hyperbole on my part was to illustrate a point. Of course things that are obvious to most, are not obvious to all.
First off, I have news for you. class B/A players suck. If that's your idea of a club heavyweight, you probably have never been a member of nor kn ...[text shortened]... in attitude, and you'll find his blitz game matching his slow game in very short order.
Originally posted by tomtom232When you're finished looking up the differences between words like "to" and "too", etc, go look up a famous quote from the Shakespearean novel Hamlet: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks". You are the lady, lol. You're trying so hard to try to convince people that you're not the one getting OWNED here that you're making an even bigger fool of yourself.
No cube_equity. I'm really smart and in fact much more smarter than you. I meant to make all those dumb comments that prove I'm, as dumb as an ox. I started doing this years ago because I knew this day would come.
And I love that retarded post you made in the French Defense thread. You're such a mindless imbecile you really do believe that Black is somehow "winning" against the Tarrasch variation of the French Defense. I'm amazed you haven't published this in NIC magazine yet. THE BUST TO THE TARRASCH FRENCH! lol.
Oh wait, I get it. You somehow knew I would be reading that thread and making a fool of you, so that's why you posted it. It was bait. Even though you made the post long before I ever made my first post in the forums, lol. You must be a psychic.
The truth is, you are a JOKE! You're typical UK trash. Uneducated, stupid, and weak in every way. Probably missing half your teeth too. You sit in front of the TV watching other people accomplish things. That's why you've made hundreds of posts bickering about the NFL. You're just an obese fan who parks his FAT ASS in front of the tellie shouting and yelling, lol.
Originally posted by Cube EquityI am too much of an idiot to figure it out. Could you repeat it in first grade English for us idiots. 😏
That might be the non-sequitur of the year award winner. I never said, nor implied, anything like that at all. Please re-read my posts a few times until this is clear to you.
