I hope not, considering i only played blitz since I started.
It means every single idea i got was killed even before I got it!
I hope not, considering i only played blitz since I started.
It means every single idea i got was killed even before I got it!
When I started playing chess (as a 12/13 year old), all I played was standard (a.k.a. slow) chess and I considered blitz/bullet not be real (as I would define it) chess or even fun. However, at this point in my life, all I have time for is bullet/blitz. I find it to be fun, but more importantly, I find that it will probably be useful when I decide to get back to standard chess because it will allow me to think quickly.
As for is it real chess, it does not feel so. At least not the way I would define real chess: the battle of well-thought out strategic and tactical ideas. However, the better I get at bullet/blitz, the closer it feels like real chess, although still far.
For the average player, I think only 5min+ games allow for high quality play. In 1min games I only see masters like Yaacov, Esserman, Hikaru, etc. playing at high levels (without blundering often). So to me Blitz can be argued as real chess, but bullet is mostly shenanigans.
Is another category of chess, so why not? I suck badly at it, so i ignore Blitz and only play in standard.
Blitz is used as tie breaks even in the world championships. The best players in the world at standard time controls also tend to be the best players in the world at blitz and bullet chess.
If blitz and bullet were just about the clock, the best players would be the best videogamers who have the fastest reflexes.
Bad news for all those who stink at blitz and bullet...
To be clear, in order to play chess well, you have to study ... chess. This usually means spending hours analysing a single game and often spending half an hour or more on a single position. Once you have the skills, then you can excel at any time control. In fact, endgame monsters such as Capablanca, Fischer, Ulf Andersson, and Carlsen were some of the best blitz players of their generations!
Is this a real thread?
Is this a fantasy?
Caught in a landslide
No escape from reality
Open your eyes
Look up to the skies and seeeeeee....
I haven't yet played blitz on this site, but I tend to be better than my contemporaries at quicker time controls. I don't think much in Online as well.
Is this a real thread?
Is this a fantasy?
Caught in a landslide
No escape from reality
Open your eyes
Look up to the skies and seeeeeee....
Guess I should have scrolled down a little more before posting my last message.
Blitz is OK. Not sure making a judgement like 'is it real chess' is appropriate as it is really just a type of chess like correspondence chess and torunament chess are just types of chess all off which have their own characters.
In a sense, no, Blitz and Bullet Chess are not "real" chess (whatever that means). Real chess should leave you with plenty of time to think wholly about your moves. That's why I don't like to play with time. But, if I must, I only want to play with an amount of time that I am comfortable with. Otherwise, the game would be "killing" my ideas and, consequentially, the spirit of the game; the spirit of chess is not "I shall play faster than you", but "I shall attack and immobilise your king".
Sometimes I watch guys playing those Lightning games (1 min for the whole game), where they take just seconds to make a move, and I'm like: "What the heck?! Do these guys even think before playing? It doesn't look like it..." And those games always end with a timeout. It's like the new objective is not attacking the king, but just holding up, surviving, if you will, for as long as possible, and playing faster than your opponent.
Do you consider that bullet and blitz chess are real chess ? Robert Fisher said once : " blitz chess kills your ideas". And really, when ever I was playing only blitz or Bullet chess for some time, my chess game started generally to suffer.