i just hit 1000 elo for the first time 😀🥳 😀

Congrats on the 1000 rating milestone! 2000 is WAY more challenging to reach than "twice as tough as 1000" because rating progression isn't linear (rating is easier to gain at the lower levels due to greater margin of error as due to the math of the rating system). 1000 rating is a great first step though! That is already better than the average (50 percent of chess players). Roughly 1500 chess.com rating is something like better than 90-95% of all players. Most people don't ever become this advanced; this isn't because chess is so incredibly hard to learn, but because there is so much to learn and most people don't invest the time for study and play to reach this level (in addition to not enough emphasis on improving, learning and studying).

Congrats on your nice milestone

Yaaay congrats

And I see you are 1000 blitz too, that's great! For most people below a certain level (me included), blitz < rapid, so I'd imagine you might be 1100+ in rapid.

Hmmm
Yeah, i guess i can see that. If you want to improve faster it may be better to play long tc's more though, as then you have more time to think

I agree 5min is a decent amount of time, yeah. But I think at any level, there will definitely be situations where you want more time to consider moves.

Lmfao, your temerity only comes off as ignorant.

At 1000, playing blitz only teaches you to make hasty garbage moves and relies on blunders made under time pressure.

Being so arrogant to scoff at people who want to learn and actually improve by taking their time and thinking about the best move and having the misguided arrogance to assume you can do all if that in 5 min is the reason you won't get far from here on out.

I think an 800 in rapid 30 min would obliterate you personally.

True blitz and speed chess is for very good (class A+) players who have already developed their skill, who want to work on muscle memory.

1000 speed chess is for people who don't really take chess seriously.

im not supporting him but you have to take into consideration that chess.com is not the only chess website.

ninjahudson wrote: Bro u made u account yesterday and only played two games u have no ida what ur talking about and I could destroy most 800 rapid players

*** "Bro", simmer down, this is not my main account. It's an account I made to play casual games.

Your arrogance is so unearned it's hilarious. I see people like you at the local chess club all the time. You seem to believe you're so genetically and mentally gifted/talented that learning tactics, positional play, and strategy during long games is not needed. You can absorb all of that in 5 minutes, unlike all the other neanderthals around you, right?!

1000 isn't even class C. Your clear aversion to playing longer games to assess your own weaknesses points to a lack of seriousness and perhaps grandiose mentality that pretty much guarantees you're not going to climb out of the novice pool.

Rapid >>>>> blitz for anything under 1800, and you'd get crushed by sub 1000's playing longer games.

Maybe I'm wrong though and you're 2500 rapid who just made an account playing blitz, right? Judging by your celebration of the 1000 milestone though, I seriously doubt it, "bro".

It's OK. Not everyone takes chess seriously. I'm glad you've found your place as a casual hobbyist. I'm sure you'll beat your friends who just watched the queens gambit for the first time on Netflix and want to start playing chess.

If I may interject, your point stands; if you have a super new chess.com account, then this doesn't necessarily mean you are super new to chess.

However, the sub-1800 crushed by sub-1000's playing longer games I'll have to disagree with. Obvious exaggeration to prove a point, but I'd estimate an OTB longer time control player rated 1000 to be maybe 1300-1400 chess.com rating. Yes, there is a slight difference due to different player pools, but the rating difference isn't that massive. Maybe an OTB player of about 1600 is equal to an online chess.com rating of 1800. It isn't that huge though.

KeSetoKaiba wrote: Larynxys wrote:

ninjahudson wrote:

..."Bro", simmer down, this is not my main account. It's an account I made to play casual games.

...blitz for anything under 1800, and you'd get crushed by sub 1000's playing longer games...

If I may interject, your point stands; if you have a super new chess.com account, then this doesn't necessarily mean you are super new to chess.

However, the sub-1800 crushed by sub-1000's playing longer games I'll have to disagree with. Obvious exaggeration to prove a point, but I'd estimate an OTB longer time control player rated 1000 to be maybe 1300-1400 chess.com rating. Yes, there is a slight difference due to different player pools, but the rating difference isn't that massive. Maybe an OTB player of about 1600 is equal to an online chess.com rating of 1800. It isn't that huge though.

*** That wasn't what I was trying to specify though.

I was saying OP would get crushed by sub 1000s playing longer games, not that any sub 1800 blitz player would get crushed by rapid sub 1000s. There is a significant difference in how you word that.

My point to OP was that first of all he comes off as extremely arrogant based on some of his comments above, and also that rapid or even daily games objectively benefit lower rated players because it gives them time to play higher quality moves without time pressure.

After you get to around 2000, this becomes less important (unless you are aiming for titles or a career in pro chess) and playing blitz becomes a way to get even better at that stage.

But at OPs stage speed chess only gives false confidence and may actually hurt his development if he relies too much on it.

Also, I find that chess.com elo varies about 100-200 from OTB, but also find OTB easier because online chess is highly unreliable due to anyone being able to get help, chess, Google videos, etc at any time during a game with little to no repercussions (assuming they aren't dumb enough to simply copy paste best moves from an engine).

I also find chess.com to be much closer to OTB ratings than lichess, which varies 400-600 points from OTB in my experience.

I agree that @Larynxys can be more polite, tbh.
Lmk if I'm being rude, I don't intend to be (seriously, feel free to drop me a DM and i will take you seriously), but indeed I do agree with @Larynxys on the benefits of playing rapid vs blitz. That said, I play blitz as "fun" games and I think there's nothing wrong with playing it for fun (or idk, playing chess in general just for fun haha); I do think it does help with improvement generally, just not as fast.