Correlation between the different time controls in chess?

After playing approximately 1 year of blitz and 1 month of bullet/standard, the order for me, by rating, now stands at (1) bullet, (2) standard, and (3) blitz. Therefore, it makes me question whether there is a valid conclusion to be made about a correlation that exists between the types of chess, in regard to time control. Evidently, the principal factors to be considered here are experience (as a player with the general time restraint) and overall skill (the consistency of playing good moves, or merely one's knowledge about chess/various openings). Of course, there is no general consensus to this question, as each person's situation differs. Personally, I believe that if you are a high-level blitz/bullet player, it doesn't necessarily mean that you will be a high-level OTB/standard time control player (without considering whether the blitz play is OTB or not). If anyone stumbles upon this post, I'd like to hear your opinion about this topic. Thanks! 

The way I think of it. If you're "good" at long time controls (like >1 hour) then you have potential to be "good" at speed games. All you'd need to do is practice how to make use of the short time control. Cut out unnecessary analysis for example.

Agreed that a "good" speed player can't necessarily transition (right away) to a "good" player at long time controls. The reverse process of cutting corners to speed yourself up is adding analysis, and if you don't have the knowledge to begin with then it's not possible / useful.

As for ratings, remember they're not an absolute measure like how fast you can run a mile. Chess.com blitz 1297 may equal chess.com standard 1421 as long as the standard pool is generally weaker than the blitz pool. By looking at many player's ratings (and playing yourself) you can get a feel for which pools are tougher.

You may also be interested in this:

http://www.chess.com/livechess/players?type=Blitz

Going by average, blitz+50 = bullet and blitz+200 = standard.

Very true, and I appreciate the feedback. Shying away a bit from the main point, I believe that I possibly started off too much with fast play, as opposed to giving myself more time to think about different positions, and the best moves that could be played. (For those just initiating an interest in chess, this may be taken as advice)

Your detail pertaining to making comparisons seems to have great relevance and importance in chess, as well as in the "real world."  Until one starts analyzing/evaluating statistics (specifically, of where he spends his time playing), he will not truly know his capability, mainly regarding skill. 

Adding onto, as well as agreeting with, what was brought up, experienced players likely can "convert" their expertise into situations where less time is allotted for execution. However, as you mentioned "cutting corners" is not the way to do it, as the knowledge, and possibly judgment for these instances (to add in) just may not "be there." 

(Again) Thank you for the advice!

I had the same start (too much speed play). I think many people have the same problem... it's so much fun and almost always available!

I have never played live chess on the internet so far. I'll look forward to it when I get a good computer with a good internet connection. I try to spend some time while making the moves in Online Chess, so that I can improve my chess.

But I've generally seen that people have higher standard ratings than blitz or bullet. And if you see the bell curves, you can get a pretty accurate estimate of what type of players are at a certain rating. And recently, the standard ratings were inflated so you'll find weak players at higher ratings than usual.

I think all players should play the longest games they can get when starting out. Blitz is impossible to play very well unless your familiar with lots of positions, which comes from playing long games. I started slow and have stayed slow. I like deep calculating games even though they make my head hurt lol

In reply to:

MuhammedAreez10- That's an unlucky situation that you're currently in. I wish you luck with live chess, (hopefully) in the near future. And, yes, I did take a look at the bell curve, which gives some helpful perspective on this topic. Thanks.

ewq85- I definitely agree with your point about playing longer games for starting out. I briefly discussed that, also. Additionally, it is very apparent that blitz/bullet are difficult to improve at (or merely be skilled at) if you aren't familiar with various positions and openings. Therefore, I would have to concur with that detail, as well. I appreciate your input!