People at chess.com play insanely aggressive

Crybaby.

Mommy Mommy, the big mean chess players are being mean to me. They wont give me time to think IN A BLITZ GAME!

Thats right. BLITZ!! It is not about positional play, it is all about beating the clock. 

If you cant stand the heat, then get the hell out of...well...hell!!

There is a wide variety of time controls here. If blitz is too rough for you, then you try some of the softer longer time controls.

You are right. I played blitz here before, it seems that alot of my opponents are not interested in chess. I usually take longer games seriously.

I agree 100% with OP.

kleelof wrote:

Crybaby.

Mommy Mommy, the big mean chess players are being mean to me. They wont give me time to think IN A BLITZ GAME!

Thats right. BLITZ!! It is not about positional play, it is all about beating the clock. 

If you cant stand the heat, then get the hell out of...well...hell!!

There is a wide variety of time controls here. If blitz is too rough for you, then you try some of the softer longer time controls.

Heyheyheyhey, I wasn't complaining about the time control at all, HE was the one who brought up that useless discussion.

I'm not talking about the horrible style of play in blitz specificly, but at chess.com in general. Blitz is still senselessly bad, though

Well, if you were positionally as strong as you claim (as Mr. Orange), shouldn't you be delighted to face overly aggressive players, because you would be able to exploit their unsound play? 

funny how he has  the same rating just about for rapid and blitz 

Probably already answered, but I'll give it a go, anyway. You have only two options in blitz:

1. Make every move count so that the game can be decided in the usually insufficient time allotted.

or

2. Move extremely quickly without thinking and hope that your opponent loses on time.

It's typically a balance of the two, but either option suggests making more threats than you would see in a long game. It's called blitz because you are... well... "blitzing" (defined as an intense and/or sudden military attack). Trying to use any other strategy generally means losing.

Please note that I admittedly do not play blitz at this point. I'm too old and slow to compete in the hundred-yard dash, as well. Time favors the young.

To each their own, but to me, that's basically option number 2. You are not moving decisively enough to decide the game, and hoping that your opponent either loses on time or makes a critical error.

Igor smirnov literally says to play blitz in an attacking style and all sacrifices are good in blitz.

While no style of play is invalid, you might keep in mind that two positional players playing blitz against each other will not typically complete the game. It'll be entirely a question of which loses on time.

I mean, it is blitz. What did you expect with restricted time controls? That's why I only play rapid.

Debutantes have balls.

Why y

Pretend I didn't write that. Why. Its been 10 years we dont need to be trying to work this out. Okay?!

If there it is a problem with chess thats the site the other mess is politic!! Your problem it is the secret events happening in the background or chess politic. Have you heard of the other league organisation of chess?? Of course not. They accuse fide as too warm or too murky or too non theoretic but swift monkey play they admitted!! And all the other mess of their cup dish plate trophy etc..

Some players are super aggressive, which is why I love the Scheviningen variation of the Sicilian so much. They think they are going to attack and they get herded into a positional game where they have no clue what to do next so they sacrifice material and get rolled.

Sometimes y.

hey hot women