That is a very interesting question. Maybe people tend to play bullet less than other variations.
Why bullet ratings are so low?
Sort:
Jan 5, 2020
0
#3
Looking at the graphs and the median and top players, bullet and blitz ratings seem roughly equal. Like... within 50 points of each other which is kind of amazing (I didn't expect that).
Blitz
https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/live
Bullet
https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/live/bullet
I'd say because bullet is rather hard when you are used to longer time controls (which most people are).
what is so hard about bullet i dont get it. i keep losing to people who have no idea of chess just know how to move fast the pieces around
Jan 7, 2020
0
#7
Nathan_Kriis wrote:
what is so hard about bullet i dont get it...
Well,
"...i keep losing to people who have no idea of chess..."
How so if it's not hard?
"...just know how to move fast the pieces around"
Ah! Maybe that's harder than it seems, then.
Jan 7, 2020
0
#8
Nathan_Kriis wrote:
what is so hard about bullet i dont get it. i keep losing to people who have no idea of chess just know how to move fast the pieces around
You're probably calculating too much. At least for 1 minute games you have to be willing to play a lot of junk moves and at a fast pace.
Nathan_Kriis wrote:
what is so hard about bullet i dont get it. i keep losing to people who have no idea of chess just know how to move fast the pieces around
exactly, only reason I play bullet is to play against my friends who have no time. Bullet is really just pre move to victory
But I don't get this. If bullet chess is harder to play than, say blitz, then it is harder for everyone. So the rankings should not be that different from blitz.
Jan 7, 2020
0
#11
amirhomayoun wrote:
But I don't get this. If bullet chess is harder to play than, say blitz, then it is harder for everyone. So the rankings should not be that different from blitz.
Ratings aren't an absolute measure. 1400 in one time control or one website might be 1800 somewhere else. So even if everyone had a bullet rating lower than their blitz rating (this isn't true) it wouldn't mean bullet is harder.
Nathan_Kriis wrote:
Checkmate them quickly then.
what is so hard about bullet i dont get it. i keep losing to people who have no idea of chess just know how to move fast the pieces around
llamonade2 wrote:
amirhomayoun wrote:
But I don't get this. If bullet chess is harder to play than, say blitz, then it is harder for everyone. So the rankings should not be that different from blitz.
Ratings aren't an absolute measure. 1400 in one time control or one website might be 1800 somewhere else. So even if everyone had a bullet rating lower than their blitz rating (this isn't true) it wouldn't mean bullet is harder.
True. Thanks.
Natural transition of players as they get better: Rapid -> Blitz -> Bullet (most cases).
So, I would expect the pool of players in bullet to be better than blitz and rapid overall.
Since rating is defined also by the rating of your opponent pool, lower scores may be expected in the faster for the faster time formats.
It just makes sense to me this way. I have been asking myself this same question for a long time.
My ratings: Bullet 850; Blitz 1100; Rapid 1300
I cant reach even 1900 in bullet. Whats the reason for bullet ratings being so low in comparison to longer time controls