Why do we blunder (and what makes bad chess players)

I think there’s been endless research done on what makes a good chess player, but recently I’ve been fascinated with my own predicament as a bad chess player (700 rated blitz player with 3000+ games).

I’ve both analyzed my games and consulted this forum to find out why and the most common answers seem to be:

1) Blitz is not real chess. You will not improve playing blitz
2) You are hanging pieces
3) You are missing hanging pieces

I tend to ignore point number 1 because there seems to be no evidence that there is a ceiling when playing blitz almost exclusively (and it’s not in the 700’s).

This leaves me with point 2 and 3. It’s clear that these things are happening but I’m interested in “Why” it happens. It seems to be one of those things where people often conclude “It just happens” but really upon closer look it’s quite dynamic and complex.
I’m even considering talking to other bad chess players like myself to get an understanding of this phenomenon.

It just seems like not much research is being done on bad chess because good chess is apparently more fascinating.
Can anybody even remotely relate to what I’m saying or am I the crazy one here?

Ok here’s the deal, I’m not good either but playing blitz constantly isn’t going to do crap, play a lot more daily and rapid, and really think about your moves, read some books, learn endgame theory, study tactics and principles is what’s going help, the main reason you are not improving is because you at playing blitz, I’m sorry but it’s true, blitz is for fun and that’s it

I guess I'm more interested in the dynamics of losing. Sure, if I read books or actually study tactics that would make me improve. But that's not really my goal. 

My goal is to figure out how losing really works, and one of the things I want to keep constant is the time control. Sure, I'd play some other time controls for fun but Blitz is definitely where my focus is.

Always check your intended move is no blunder before you play it.
This little mental discipline alone is enough to weed out blunders from your games.
There was research on this by Blumenfeld and Krogius (psychologist).
Haste makes waste.
Sit on your hands.

I know when I hang a piece it is usually because I'm distracted by some other aspect of the game, like planning strategy or looking for a tactic instead of paying attention to the here and now of the actual position on the board. Good players tend to be more pragmatic, sit on their hands and actually pay attention to their opponents moves too, rather than just their own strategy. Hope that helps?

Thanks everyone for trying to help me. I really do appreciate it. But just to be clear, I’m not trying improve. At the same time I am not failing on purpose either (as that can get me banned). Rather I am trying to analyze the mindset and logic behind losses in its most natural form, which is from a bad player like myself playing the best I could.
I might be sounding a bit crazy at this point but I just wanted to see if there was anyone who is just fascinated with the losses, rather than wins.

#6
You can only win a chess game if your opponent makes a mistake. You do not win chess games by good moves, you lose chess games by bad moves. He who makes the last mistake loses.
"All games between players rated <1800 are decided on pieces being blundered on almost every move." - Carlsen

You may feel that stronger players appear to blunder less, and in part, this is true. But if you watch a 2500 - 3000 blitz player, you'll notice that almost all of them look for forcing moves on the board even before they start their tactic process.

They also rarely repeat the same mistake...

There is no quick cure, just overall board vision and an almost instant thought process of making safety checks before moving. i.e. Looking for forcing moves for both sides (checks, captures, threats) is a must. 

What happens for lower-rated players is that we get caught up in the speed and forget the checks, captures, threats process. It needs to be done constantly, not just when you remember.  

I totally agree this. But what I'm trying to figure out is why these bad moves happen. 

Most would agree that this could be due to time pressure and lack of checking the consequences of moves. 

But why? 

Why for example, can I drive a car safely on the road but I can not do the same in chess. I guess that's what I'm trying to figure out. 

coincidently this is still related to that thread about stress while playing chess...here i am bringing my comment from there...i have significant ups and downs in chess a lot. its not rare. my worst down usually occurs when i am nervous or when i desperately try to win on time in bullet from the beginning. that's how i lost bullet pathetically because i made random quick moves and pre-moves in opening. and its not always about blunder. sometimes missed win. also, nervousness sometimes strikes (especially in puzzles, bullet, or rated games). that also affects my performance. some of the opening moves along with the ideal lines i've memorized suddenly disappear from my memories

 
That is my question too. I have noticed that your puzzle rating is much higher than your blitz rating. Probably  puzzle ratings are inflated, but I think you should have a higher rating for games. The same happens to me. I think that hoodoothere is right, it is some sort of "neural overloading". The point is that we always have to conceive plans (or so they say), while it is not strictly necessary to use tactics all the time, and it is not always possible to deliver tactical blows. So we tend to focus too much on strategy and plans and do not check for blunders, especially in blitz games, where we have to be "practical". Intuitive players probably do better, because they see tactics more at a glance, while analytical players need more to check and calculate. Probably tygxc and Jack_Irish are right, we should develop good habits and discipline in our thinking process. You can safely drive a car on the road because you don't need to make a performance, but try to drive in a race, with so many variables to consider all the time. If you just drive safely, you will never win!

I will answer those questions, the answer might be a bit long but bear with me. First up, It's not about reading books. It's just that a new player doesn't develop core skills while playing blitz. Every sport/activity has a core skill. For example in football the core skill of a player is how well he can control the ball with his feet. That's the basis and everything else is cherry on top. A player can learn deep team strategies in football but if he is clumsy with his foot control over the ball then he would always remain bad.

In chess, that "core skill" is your ability to "see" the board a few moves ahead. "I play this, he will play this, i play this and then he plays that" etc etc... you need to get a clear picture in your head after every move. If u are seeing one move less than your opponent then u will ALWAYS lose, regardless of your chess knowledge.

The difference is, in football for example the foot control comes by just playing. The more you play, the more your muscles get better at controlling the ball. In chess however, the ability to see the board down the line requires time and patience to train. You can play 10 blitz games, making moves fast on the board and it would be far less useful than if u just sat down on the board with one "tricky" position with a lot of tactics and spend the same 50 minutes(which u spent on blitz) trying to visualize all different variations. 

The core ability to "look ahead" or "look down a few moves" doesn't come with haste. Your brain needs time to think, to get a clear picture of the board a few moves down the line. That's why for a new player, playing blitz exclusively is very very bad since he won't ever be able to properly visualize variations on the board since he will not be used to doing it.

@kartikeya_tiwari. I don't know... I have spent a lot of time on puzzles and calculate quite a lot of variations when I do them, but I still blunder a lot, both in blitz and standard time control. I don't think that if you see one move less than your opponent you will always lose. It depends on how much you are intuitive. Try to beat LC0, setting it to not calculate at all. Its "intuitive" understanding of the position makes it play at least at 2000 points (I have checked it with other weak engines). If we have a clear understanding of the position, we place our pieces better and are less prone to tactical shots, saving more time to make blunder checks too. So studying strategy should help, but it is not easy. Even if you read a lot of books, it remains kind a mistery.

Well, "quite a lot" is very subjective. How much is quite a lot? many people have been slowly training visualization for years.

The amount of time one spends on one position is also very important. You can quickly try to calculate in a position or you may sit on your hands for 30 minutes trying to calculate everything to the end.

I maintain my stance that a player who always sees one move less than his opponent will always lose. Positional understanding means absolutely nothing when your opponent is constantly able to see more moves or calculate deeper than you.

One thing I have noticed is that during a game people are very hasty to make moves, especially in the opening. So even though u may spend a lot of time calculating variations ans training board vision, if u are not taking it slow and easy in a regular game then your training won't yield any results as it's not being used.

#9
You should read Krogius on this or also Kotov.
They explain in detail the psychological factors that cause mistakes and blunders.

Chess engines choose their move after analyzing EVERY alternative out to the horizon of their search depth.

Human chess players (as opposed to engines) tend to select a move by first winnowing down the possibilities (initially, twenty or so legal alternatives) to a handful of potential candidate-moves. These two-to-four candidate-moves are then analyzed and the results compared, and the player will choose the move that he feels leads to the most favorable outcomes.

You aren't going to PLAY a good move unless it was included in your initial short-list of candidate-moves. And it won't be one of your candidate-moves unless your attention has been drawn to that good move. 

So training your intuition is crucial, since your short-list of candidate moves is compiled BEFORE you analyze the position... ie: the short-list of moves is chosen on intuition or gut feeling.

Chess intuition is best trained at slow time controls, which is why that advice is so common.

@kartikeya_tiwari

" Well, 'quite a lot' is very subjective. How much is quite a lot? many people have been slowly training visualization for years."

  If I remember well, studies show that, on average, in tactical positions FMs calculate 50 nodes and go 5 moves deep, while GMs calculate 25 nodes and look 3.5 moves ahead. In difficult tactical positions I calculate more than 50 moves and go more than 5 moves deep, but a FM is twice as fast.

"The amount of time one spends on one position is also very important. You can quickly try to calculate in a position or you may sit on your hands for 30 minutes trying to calculate everything to the end."

  Yes but in a real game we rarely have the luxury.

"I maintain my stance that a player who always sees one move less than his opponent will always lose. Positional understanding means absolutely nothing when your opponent is constantly able to see more moves or calculate deeper than you."

  As I said, Leela at 1 node is a solid proof that intuitive understanding of the position, alone, makes you better than <2000 rated players. Also, sometimes I beat weak engines (<2100), which, for sure, always see more moves and calculate deeper than me (and FMs too).

"One thing I have noticed is that during a game people are very hasty to make moves, especially in the opening. So even though u may spend a lot of time calculating variations ans training board vision, if u are not taking it slow and easy in a regular game then your training won't yield any results as it's not being used."

  Yes, the problem is that we have to manage time too. Usually players blitz the opening until they know the lines, to save time for the middlegame. Understanding when to calculate and when not requires experience and intuition, again. I'd like to spend 30 minutes on every move, but I'd lose on time.
 

#16
Chess engines do not look at all moves: they also narrow down their candidate moves.
#17
Most chess players play too fast. In an open tournament this is most clear. At any given time the weak players in the rear of the playing hall have played more moves than the grandmasters on the top boards. The grandmasters are never in a hurry.

Just some more personal observations after losing more games.
It seems that I can’t win against 600 rated players anymore. But I also feel strongly that these are definitely not the same 600 rated I have been playing in the past.
There’s definitely an environmental factor to this.
At the same time I also feel that when I start a game, I already feel a minor piece down, like I started without one of my knights. It’s a weird feeling.
Fascinating nevertheless.

#19
If you lose a game, that means you made a mistake and your opponent exploited it. So the issue is not your opponent, it is you and your mistake.
"At the same time I also feel that when I start a game, I already feel a minor piece down, like I started without one of my knights."
++ This seems irrational. You start with the same 16 men. Maybe you adopted a careless attitude that makes you blunder a piece sooner.