Is 10+0 players pool stronger than the 15+10 pool or the 30+0 pool?

In every website that I have played I have noticed that you will find different pools of players in different time controls. For instance, on this website 10+0 used to be cathegorised as blitz and 3+2 pool was stronger than 10+0 pool (at least in my experience), even though both belonged to the same rating cathegory.  What you can see even now is that rapid pool as a whole is weaker than blitz pool as a whole. This is true on this site as well as on other sites. Now, here is my question, in your experience, is 30+0 pool stronger than 10+0? And is 15+10 stronger than 10+0? I used to think that 15+10 was stronger than 10+0 but maybe that was me being better in faster time controls. I am not sure, but I am still inclined to believe that 15+10 is a stronger pool than 10+0.

What do you all think?

Depends on what you mean by stronger. Do you mean that they play more accurate moves?

I haven't seen any evidence that 3+2 players play more accurately than 10+0, although it often feels that way, because of the increased pressure during the game.

That part about 3+2 vs 10+0 blitz refers to the time when 10+0 time format belonged to blitz. I don't mean that the quality of 3+2 games was higher than the quality of 10+0 games, I mean that when 10+0 belonged to blitz rating cathegory it was a lot easier for me to beat players in 10+0 than in 3+2 even though I played fair amount of 3+2, especially on another website. I have seen many people on forums who had the same impression, but I don't have a study, or some hard evidence for this, that's why I said "at least in my experience" in that part of the comment. What my claim is (for which I don't have hard evidence) is that back then it was easier for most people to earn rating points by playing 10+0 blitz, than by playing 3+2 blitz. For instance, I think that a player who reached 1500 blitz by playing 3+2 was a stronger player than somebody who reached 1500 by playing 10+0 blitz.

When it comes the comparison between the rapid pool as a whole vs the blitz pool as a whole, you can see the data on this website https://www.chessratingcomparison.com/Graphs

You can see that rapid ratings are inflated compared to blitz ratings. That is, somebody with a rapid rating of, let's say, 1400 is expected to have a blitz rating of 1250. In other words, it is easier for most people to achieve a given rating in rapid than in blitz. It is expected for players to have a higher rapid rating than blitz rating and it is expected for people to be in lower percentage in the blitz pool than in the rapid pool.

I'm only a 600 atm and part of the reason I play longer time controls is because it gives me more time to think out my moves and plan ahead. With a still fleeting knowledge of tactics and openings, I've found that when I react to moves in a "speed chess" fashion, I blunder more as I don't have moves memorized and am still in the process of working my board vision.

I've also noticed that as I've gotten more competent in my play the old adage I was told of "The player who takes more time to make their moves usually wins at 'this level" starts to ring less accurate as I'm able to make better decisions faster due to experience, improved board vision over time, and improved tactics. After while playing these time controls against lower rated players means you're going to be spending half your game waiting for your opponent to actually make their move so you both up the challenge and lower your waiting time by lowering the time control. 

As one of those who follows the same old chess.com story of "I was really good at chess when I was playing friends and family/in high school chess club, then got on here and got my butt kicked", I can tell you when I was lower ranked it was just more comfortable in general playing on 60 minute time controls because it's basically playing "classical" chess and is more comfortable without the time pressure, but as I'm getting more competent even at my still relatively lower level, I'm finding myself desiring playing lower time controls (even 15 or 10) even more just because it streamlines the game and adds more of a dynamic challenge with the time pressure.

My experience when I started to play more seriously  this year:

1. 15/10 and 5/5 were my best games in terms of accuracy( 82 and 80 percent respectively), improvement, win percentage and not timing out. The time increment is an end game saver for me.

2. I ran into many sand baggers on this site at 2/1 bullet, so I stopped playing. I actually created a thread with the evidences on record. I am 1000 here and 1600 on Lichess.

I would even go on a limb and say Lichess has fair match making. You can go thru my rapid history and see how many cheaters I have ran into this year alone. Maybe because I mostly play tournaments? League points do weird things to people?

You are doing good job improving at chess. When I started playing chess online 3 years ago I thought I would be rated around 1500 on this website or 1800 on lichess. I also played chess with my family, I played it when I was in elementary school. When I started playing online chess on lichess I was rated 1000 rapid, 950 blitz which is similar to your rating right now, as lichess ratings are inflated compared to ratings on this site.  The point is, I was in a similar situation that you are now. 

I don't have the mental energy to play more than one 60+0 or 30+0 game in a row. I feel drained after such games (sometimes even hungry). So now I would play 1 longer game and then analyse it and then play couple of 10+0 or 3+2 games. When I was around your level I also didn't have the patience to play 60+0 games or 30+0 games and take my time. I would play those time formats as if I was playing 10+0. Today on the other hand, when I played a 30+0 game I checkmated my opponent with 1 second left on the clock  https://www.chess.com/game/live/55560027311

A couple of days ago I played a 60+0 game and I made 29 moves in 29 minutes. Often when I play 60+0 I end up thinking that I don't have much time and I wish I were playing a 90+30 game instead. I like when my 60+0 opponents take their time for moves as I can think while their clock is ticking. But, again, I was just like you when I was at your level, I hated waiting for opponents to make moves and I would move way more quickly than it is neccessary in those longer games. 

When it comes to my advice as to which time control to play, Idk. I improved by playing various different time controls, maybe faster time controls will benefit you, but many good players say that playing slow games like 45+45 or 60+0 will help you the most, assuming that you take your time when you play them and analyse your games afterwards. But it is hard to have mental energy for more than 1 such game a day, and if you like faster time controls, I think you should play them. That will also mean that you will play more games and expose yourself to more positions.  Who knows, maybe you will, like me, one day when you reach 1500 want to play more 60+0 games and use all your time on the clock and then wish that you had started a slower game. 

Thank you for your feedback as to how you are better at 15+10 than at other rapid controls. Yes, the increment is a saver for me as well, in fact, today I played a 30+0 game where I checkmated my opponent with 1 second left on the clock, that game could have easily ended in a draw by timeout vs insufficient material. 

I have also witnessed sandbaggers in bullet when I was climbing the ladder. I remember when I managed to flag one of them he offered a rematch twice, he was angry that he lost to like a 1100, 1200, 1300 or whatever I was at the time. Now, I was not a bullet sandbagger I simply didn't play bullet in a long long time, so my bullet rating wasn't on pair with my other ratings at the time when this event has happened.

You haven't played a lot of bullet games on lichess. I would wait for your bullet rating to stabilise first. If your rating stabilises at 1600, you should be over 1300 on this site.  However, your blitz rating on lichess is lower than it should be based on the fact that you are 1380 on this website. 1380 blitz on this website maps to low 1700s lichess blitz. So, in blitz, you are underrated there.  https://www.chessratingcomparison.com/Graphs

I would wait for more data to come before making conclusions. Maybe you will get to 1300 bullet if you play more games.

Improving board vision is one of the most beneficial things that you can do at your level. Board vision is neccessary for everything else.

dude0812 I agree with you , 15 10 pool is stronger than 10 min, I struggled alot to hit 1500 in 15 10 pool and then in only 2 weeks of playing 10 min i hit 1600

I've saw a similar topic being discussed before. eg.

Two players of equal blitz rating, say 2,000.
Player A has maintained a 2,000 blitz score at 3+0.
Player B has maintained a 2,000 blitz score at 5+0.
The claim is that generally, Player A will be stronger in both time controls, over a larger sample size of games. One off games still have good odds of going either way.

I have not experienced this significantly myself, but one way to attempt to do a study on this could be to have a sample of exclusively 3+0 players suddenly switch to 5+0 for a week (or >25 games) and vice versa (or in the OP's case, 10+0 vs 15+10) and (assuming they avoid each other and play the random pool) see if either group collectively has upward or downward rating growth over the course of the next week or 25 or so games, or if rating change is completely random.

If anyone is willing to group together some guinea pigs for this, I'd partake myself!

In any event, I think it's hard to say Group A is "stronger" than Group B when the time control is not specified. eg. a "2000 blitz" player is stronger than a "2000 rapid" player. Stronger at what exactly? A 2000 blitz player who has never played rapid vs a 2000 rapid player who has never played blitz... The 2k blitz player will likely be stronger specifically at speed chess, or time controls up to around 10+0 or 15+0.
The rapid player will likely prevail at longer time controls of 15+10 (with increment) or longer.
The point is, the two groups who play two different time controls would have built up different skills. The blitz player or 10+0 player, will be stronger at calculating more lines to a much shallower depth, and will likely rely on pattern recognition and intuition a bit more, maybe also likely to be a bit more aggresive or 'dubious' with their play style as it's harder to punish dubious play in faster time controls.
The slower-time-control player will be stronger at calculating fewer lines but to a much deeper degree. If group A vs group B at a long time control game, group B's experience at deeper calculation should provide an advantage. If group A vs group B at a fast time control, group A's experience at calculating multipe shallow lines quickly will provide the advantage. 
I think it's hard to say one is 'stronger' overall without defining a time control they're stronger at.

If you find that as a 10+0 time control player, you can maintain your rapid rating but you drop rating when you play in 15+10, this *could* be because the 15+10 pool is objectively stronger, but it *could* also be because you might not have the same level of calculation in 15+10 (which would require you to be disciplined to calculate a little bit deeper).
If you play a 15+10 game at the same pace as you do in 10+0, you'll likely have a disadvantage from the very start.

my overall experience on few (lichess, chess.com, ICC, C24...) servers that, longer time control, weaker player pool, or takes longer to find opponent.

yes, in blitz games, and even bullet you ll find strong GMs, IMs playing constantly, on 15 or 30 min pools I played maybe just 2-3 games in this year against IM,GM titled players.

the reason is now days everyone likes to play bullet or blitz games. Is it just because they do not want to wait until opponent makes move, or it is more funny or whatever. or perhaps if some mistake is done, just by two clicks you are in new game, the old one is forgotten already. maybe nobody likes to end up in worse position and suffer next 30-40 minutes. maybe if you are in good mood this morning you might to pump up your bullet rating for 100-200 points, who knows....

see, I completely decided to abandon blitzing (why? I just do not like that kind of chess based on cheap tricks, mouse slips... and all things which are coming along, and perhaps very unhealthy - stressful, poor connection from time to time makes it useless to play short games), I play only rapid and what can say is the next:

here on chess.com, i am facing issues, once reached 2150-2200, to find 15+10 opponent of same level, if you look on games in progress, mostly 10+0 is what is played, which, if you ask me is same as blitz. out of standard pool time controls, i tried few times and never get paired.

on lichess i have no issues to get paired 30+0 every time i seek for the game, i do not wait so much. also on lichess, ICC, FICS, it is much easier to see seeks out of standard pools (for example if someone claims 24+7 game or something like that) because seeks are listed and you may use filters to reduce content which you do not need. here is kind of a graph, harder to follow....

let us say if I claim out of standard pool (time per game) game on all mentioned servers (considering that on all servers i am seeking in range from 2000 rating points and above) :

on lichess i'll get paired always, sometime you might wait few minutes, depending what you seek

on FICS i'll get paired also, but there are less players now (in some peak hours 150-200 registred plus hundred or more guests), but still if you play unrated you may attract someone from guest pool and still play few  games of good quality.

on ICC, mostly 15+0, same as FICS, less players are there now (mostly about 200-300 players in lobby when i log in, although there are some bots too) so sometime you'll wait few minutes and get weaker opponent, I you seek blitz more often you'll face with some FIDE titled player.

FOA; there is good option 'lobby' so your and other seeks will be visible, and you'll get paired but it depend how much you'll wait.

C24; i do not play any more there since new play zone is released, but i played 15+0 games on old play zone for few months, and same experience as all of above mentioned.

generally on all servers, competition in rapid pool is, as i said, much much weaker than on blitz/bullet pools, but in rapid, quality of chess game is what is considered most. And possibility to analyze, to learn something new, to practice some elements, what you can find useful from 1+0 game, perhaps hearth attack or brain stroke??

at end still i am still losing rapid games on all three mentioned servers (lichess, FICS, ICC), so it means competition is still enough strong for average club players and down bellow.

I would also like to participate in such a study. When it comes to rapid vs blitz, most people on chess.com who play both blitz and rapid have higher rapid ratings than blitz ratings. Most players who play both blitz and rapid are in higher percentage in rapid than in blitz. If you randomly select a person who is 1400 rapid and randomly select a person who is rated 1400 at blitz, the person who is 1400 blitz has better chance of beating 1400 rapid player in both blitz and in rapid time control. 1400 rapid rating maps to 1250 blitz rating. Here is the data for this https://www.chessratingcomparison.com/Graphs

That same thing has happened to me when I was your strentgh, I feel like 1500 rapid players who reached it by playing 15+10 are stronger than 1500 rapid players who reached it by playing 10+0, or maybe I was just better at faster time controls than in slower ones.

Although at ratings higher than 2000 (such as yours), the data says that rapid and blitz ratings equalize. However, at levels below 2000, rapid ratings are inflated compared to blitz ratings. https://www.chessratingcomparison.com/Graphs

I am verry bad in blitz altough 10 min it's a slow blitz ,it felt easier than 15+10

I reached 1900 in rapid by playing 10+0 rapid, I am not sure I would be able to reach it by playing 15+10. In fact when I was in high 1700s and low 1800s I would gain rating by playing 10+0 and then lose points by playing 15+10. A similar thing has happened on lichess. Although, it seems to me that I have goten better at 15+10 so the difference between my strength at 15+10 and 10+0 seems to be at least a little bit lower than it used to be. What do you think about 30+0 time control, is it harder than 15+10? If not, is it harder than 10+0?

I don't know about 30 min pool,i  played only few games

The thing about 10/0 and 30/0 is that one of the players almost always uses way more time than the other, for 10/0 this is more often than not disadvantageous and in 30/0 advantageous. In 15/10 time management is never really an issue and so both players are able to carefully play their best (though blunders still happen) which is what makes the games feel more competitive.