What does a 1400 blitz player have that a 1200 blitz doesn't have?
Sort:
Feb 21, 2021
0
#3
Means that their play is more strategic than that of a 1200. 1200s tend to just know a few openings
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
freerobuxman wrote:
Is there any way to improve as a 1200 blitz player?
Knight outposts!
Knight outpost tactic earned me like a 200 rating gain!
You must learn it!
Deranged wrote:
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
yeah dude i once defeated a 2000 guy and then lost to a 1100 guy.
Me who is 1k in blitz...
Joke: 1400 have 200 move rating then 1200 player hahahhahahahahhahahhahahhahahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahhahahahhahahah
teju17 wrote:
Deranged wrote:
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
yeah dude i once defeated a 2000 guy and then lost to a 1100 guy.
Definitely. I'm 2000 and I've had plenty of losses against 1400s.
Like on a good day, a 1400 can play like an expert. They'll have a solid middlegame strategy and they'll spot some cool attacking ideas. But on a bad day, they'll make some truly horrific blunders, like leaving a piece hanging because the only thing protecting it is a rook that's tied down to the back rank.
The inconsistency is what kills them.
Strategy? What are you talking about? All comes down to blunders and tactics!
Idk I never tried
drewbchess wrote:
Deranged wrote:
teju17 wrote:
Deranged wrote:
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
yeah dude i once defeated a 2000 guy and then lost to a 1100 guy.
Definitely. I'm 2000 and I've had plenty of losses against 1400s.
Like on a good day, a 1400 can play like an expert. They'll have a solid middlegame strategy and they'll spot some cool attacking ideas. But on a bad day, they'll make some truly horrific blunders, like leaving a piece hanging because the only thing protecting it is a rook that's tied down to the back rank.
The inconsistency is what kills them.
I would say a 1400 really only has a chance in blitz ad bullet though. If we are are talking about rapid or classical, no way a 1400 wins vs a 2000
Just wait till I dig up a rapid game against a 2000 in my archive
*starts digging
why cant i post in live chess chats it says chat disabled
Deranged wrote:
teju17 wrote:
Deranged wrote:
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
yeah dude i once defeated a 2000 guy and then lost to a 1100 guy.
Definitely. I'm 2000 and I've had plenty of losses against 1400s.
Like on a good day, a 1400 can play like an expert. They'll have a solid middlegame strategy and they'll spot some cool attacking ideas. But on a bad day, they'll make some truly horrific blunders, like leaving a piece hanging because the only thing protecting it is a rook that's tied down to the back rank.
The inconsistency is what kills them.
I beat 2 1900s in a row 2 weeks ago and now I'm on a massive tilt
1400-1200 = 200
Seriously though, these questions aren't logical. There isn't some magical thing missing. They do a couple things better that makes them do better. It could be openings, tactics or even just time management.
If you take a 1200 rated player and make him play his openings like a god he will be higher rated. If you do the same for his tactics, he will also rank up.
The best thing to assume is that they do everything a little better on average. There is no specific thing.
Feb 22, 2021
0
#18
nTzT hat geschrieben:
1400-1200 = 200
Seriously though, these questions aren't logical. There isn't some magical thing missing. They do a couple things better that makes them do better. It could be openings, tactics or even just time management.
If you take a 1200 rated player and make him play his openings like a god he will be higher rated. If you do the same for his tactics, he will also rank up.
The best thing to assume is that they do everything a little better on average. There is no specific thing.
what is the difference between me and a 2400 blitz player then? 👀
Same thing? Or maybe they don't just lose in the middlegame and have to resort to flagging
drewbchess wrote:
Deranged wrote:
teju17 wrote:
Deranged wrote:
1400s are basically just 1200 rated players that will occasionally play a good game, once in a while.
They're very inconsistent though, and have far more bad games than good games.
When I say a "good game", I'm talking about games where they don't make any catastrophic blunders, they develop and co-ordinate their pieces properly, they control the centre and they spot "puzzle rush" style tactics to take home the victory.
The 1400-1800 range is mostly full of these sorts of "inconsistent but capable" players.
yeah dude i once defeated a 2000 guy and then lost to a 1100 guy.
Definitely. I'm 2000 and I've had plenty of losses against 1400s.
Like on a good day, a 1400 can play like an expert. They'll have a solid middlegame strategy and they'll spot some cool attacking ideas. But on a bad day, they'll make some truly horrific blunders, like leaving a piece hanging because the only thing protecting it is a rook that's tied down to the back rank.
The inconsistency is what kills them.
I would say a 1400 really only has a chance in blitz ad bullet though. If we are are talking about rapid or classical, no way a 1400 wins vs a 2000
Is there any way I can improve on my consistency?
Is there any way to improve as a 1200 blitz player?