I really suck at 10 minute games

I've been playing 10 minute chess games here (I'm not sure if that's considered blitz or not) and my rating at that is about 700. But then in the online (correspondence) games, I'm about 1300 rating. What's with the huge difference? Does this mean I'm really bad at chess? I'm really slow at thinking but I can definitely come up with decent tactics if given more time. Can anyone here teach me?

So I gotta ask, am I the only one who has this problem? or is this normal for players??

Some players require more time to think and figure things out. Sounds like right now you require a lot of time to evaluate positions and come up with good plans and moves. Nothing wrong with that, perhaps just continue to play the Turn Based chess for now and play Live chess later. You could also try playing longer Live games, instead of 10 minute/game, move it up to 15 minute/game, Or even higher, like 30 minute/game.

Same issue here. About 1900 online chess rating and rising. Been at 1500 blitz/whatever for ages. 
I've noticed that when I play a blitz game I play without a plan, I can come out with a retarded position after the opening and loads of beginner stuff.
And when I play online chess I can't help but applaud my genius sometimes >:) 

Tho somehow I'm usually around 2100-2200 in tactics trainer (which is sometimes like blitz games) and about 1900 Chess mentor. 

I think it can have to do with the display of the board tho. When I play online I can set up a position on a real board, get a cup of coffee and just calculate. The display of the chessboard is not as obvious for me.

Ratings within different systems don't really have any relationship to each other. With a different pool of players and different games, you wouldn't expect your ratings to be consistent even with the same strength. The Tactics Trainer and Chess Mentor ratings certainly have no connection whatsoever with your actual chess game ratings.

It's true that in a fast game you have less time to think and will make more mistakes than in a longer game, but the same is also true for your opponents, so on the average it shouldn't be a disadvantage and shouldn't affect your rating. Equally, you may think you do better on longer games because you have more time to think, but your opponent also has a lot more time to think, and so this should balance out as well.

However, if on average you're playing stronger players rather than players around your own strength, then you probably will have a greater relative disadvantage in faster games, since the difference between them being sufficiently familiar with the position to be able to make good moves quickly while you just making blunder after blunder under time pressure is likely to be greater than the difference between your respective calculation abilities when you both have three days to think about each move. If you're very new to chess in general, then you're likely to get roundly creamed by even slightly stronger players in fast games for this reason, and your rating will plummet as a result. The solution is to just play slower games so you have a chance to think about things and gain that familiarity that they have.

In your particular case, you've only played 10 blitz games here and lost 9 of them. This isn't anywhere near enough games to calculate a reliable rating. Everyone has a losing streak from time to time, and you can end up with a very low rating just by chance if you happen to have yours right when you start playing rated games on a particular site. In Online Chess, you've only played three games, so that's an even more unreliable rating. Neither of your ratings are particularly meaningful at this point, and if comparing them is a questionable endeavour at the best of times, it's even more so when they're both unreliable.

I have sucked at speed chess for almost 40 years. I more or less gave up on it. Don't worry about not being particularly good at it. How you play when you have time to think about moves is more important in judging your skills at chess.

Why would tactics trainer and chess mentor have nothing in common with your other ratings? I would say they are very related, but 1900 blitz rating is not 1900 tactics rating. I'm not speaking of the obvious reason here "blitz contains opening theory, strategy, blah blah, which tactics trainer doesn't." I'm speaking of the factor of separete systems. 
Example: A 1800 rated blitz player here on chess.com can be rated 1400 on let's say chesscube.com. I think you get it by now, if not just ask for a longer explanation.
Anyways my point is that if I have a higher chess mentor and tactics trainer rating than my lil'bro I'm extremely likely to get a higher blitz rating and therefore tactics trainer and chess mentor have lots in common with blitz/any chess rating at all.

Thanks for the comments guys!! I actually feel much better knowing that I'm not the only one who does quite badly at blitz. I'm going to keep on playing and training to get better. I have actually played in other chess sites before and just started here at chess.com and I'm loving it! Cheers

I have only just recently sucked at it. 

I realized long ago that I often just start making the first legal move I spot instead of something that makes sense as a move in a sequence in a game that has some intention behind it other than the need to push a clock button. This makes games suck like you're a complete nitwit.

Unfortunately my need to look for something sensible to do makes me play about 3 moves in 5 minutes.

I do too. That's why I play longer games. Like 15/10.

Hey!  I'm drunk and high as a kite right now.  I think it's time for some blitz chess.  Anyone wanna challenge me?  I'll be on live chess.  (9:52 PM EDT)

Ok mission accomplished.  Now I can go back to the forums.

Kabayan do you study chess? Because if you study chess, your overall play will improve(which can translate to better play in blitz)... For example, if your position reached a rook endgame, and you study rook endgames, while your opponent did not, you  got huge advantage because you have an idea what to do, it means you will move faster than your opponent...

Here is another gem, the druker I get:

i dont understand the stupid 10 minute chess. sometimes i have taken more coins of the opponent but still at the end it declares my opponent as the winner. how does it calculate the winner, based on the number of coins that you still have?

or

based on how many moves you have made?

or

just randomly select someone as the winner. this 10 minute game seems to pick the winner very randomly...

Coins? It sounds like it's chess you don't understand, not 10 minute chess.

Um...what?

Whoever runs out of time loses. I'm not sure if it's necessary to call the flag though.

I would suggest 15|5 to ease yourself into blitz chess. People are worse at blitz because:

1.) they stress on time all game

2.) they do not double check for blunders before moving.

3.) they play aimlessly because "there isn't enough time to plan.

Remedy:

15|5 gives you another 5 minutes PLUS a 5 second increment. Use that extra 5 seconds to blunder check your moves. Use the extra 5 minutes to plan strategically. Don't stress; you'll have plenty of time. It is very hard at first, but trust me, it'll work.