15/10 v 30 min

had my very first chess lesson today at a local club

my teacher recommended 15/10 in order to increase number of games played and was pretty down on the 30 min live games as far as "online" games were concerned

he basically suggested: "play in one of the club's tournaments with a 2 hr limit if you want a real chess game; and use the "online games at 15/10 to get lots of practice getting through an opening and exposing one's self to as many games as possible" as an example

fwiw it was a blast playing otb games with helpful and encouraging players; i'm already scheduled to play my first tournament next saturday and my next lesson will be going over those games

being a sub. to john bartholomew's channel one hears much of the same; he really stresses that 15/10 time as the "sweet spot" for online games

what do you more experienced players think?

2 hour games are good. You need to be able to play those.

15 10 and 30 0 aren't real chess, in my opinion. They're fun, but there's simply not enough time to play a well-thought out game. In my opinion, 45 45 and longer is only where real chess begins, but it's a fairly large commitment. I'll say that my OTB teacher a 2500+ player, says that blitz is the best online, since you can work on getting a feel for your openings quickly and get a lot of middlegame experience. I agree, though, I don't really like blitz, in general.

thanks you two!

that's interesting about the blitz; i havent played a blitz game yet- i could barely handle a 30 min game without timing out but the sensibilities behind the reasoning for playing the shorter times sound similar to what i was told today

I find I enjoy the longer games more...the short ones really stress me out and I make really bad moves....also I think learning comes easier for me on long games because I have time to calculate....understand why one move might be better than another.

30 >15|10  but longer games are better. Also a ton of cheaters here so beware.