blitz seems way harder than rapid
Sort:
when i play blitz, way lower rated players seem like they play drastically better, like with accuracy frequently around like 95 even though they are rated like 850. is blitz just way more competitive than rapid or something? it's really frustrating because I can get to 1200 hundred in rapid so i figured getting to just 1000 in blitz wouldn't be a seemingly impossible endevour for me, but in the blitz games everyone seems to either play near perfectly or has some weird opening or trap memorized. it's really annoying
no. If you take a look at on of your last games(that which you already analysed), you can see that you have 95% Accuracy or something like that , but you played relativly bad this game. The reason for this is that the e4- lines you play are just WAY toeasy to play for your opponent. I would recommend to play either d4 or Reti(Nf3). The player at your level often dont know what to do against this stuff.
but you're right, blitz is harder than rapid😂
i just find it odd that this is an issue at the 8-900 level in blitz but not the 11-1200 area in rapid. i mean tons of people play e4 successfully at these levels i thought
I don’t believe that e4 is better than d4. I would say though at lower levels black is less used to seeing d4. As black I actually do better against d4 because I have a decent grasp of the King’s Indian and Nimzo and understand the breaks.
i was under the impression that both e4 and d4 are equally legit
At higher levels people have higher blitz ratings than rapid.
I think Blitz is very competitive and many people play it almost exclusively, therefore even at relatively low ratings they are well practiced at common openings; both playing and defending against. For beginners at least, it is also suited to younger, quicker minds.
Yes blitz is harder.
A 1700 rating in blitz puts you in the top 130,000 players, but a 1500 in rapid puts you in the top 50,000.
More people play it; plus with less time to think, your pattern recognition and intuition has to be better as there’s less time to calculate or come up with new plans and ideas.
As for 1.E4 vs D4. Both are legit, I’d stick with E4. Perfectly playable; even Magnus and Hikaru regularly opened with it against each other during the Magnus tour finals!...
A 1700 rating in blitz puts you in the top 130,000 players, but a 1500 in rapid puts you in the top 50,000.
More people play it; plus with less time to think, your pattern recognition and intuition has to be better as there’s less time to calculate or come up with new plans and ideas.
As for 1.E4 vs D4. Both are legit, I’d stick with E4. Perfectly playable; even Magnus and Hikaru regularly opened with it against each other during the Magnus tour finals!...
Playing 1.e4 or 1.d4 is good but it is more about your understanding of opening. If you understand an opening very well, like 1. c4 1.Nf3 1.b3, you can play it.
DarkKnightAttack wrote:
Playing 1.e4 or 1.d4 is good but it is more about your understanding of opening. If you understand an opening very well, like 1. c4 1.Nf3 1.b3, you can play it.
I agree, playing an opening well and understanding the nuances of the position is much more important than playing "good" openings.
Know that feeling
Blitz is harder to get a good percentile, but is easier to get a higher rating. Unless you're the type that can focus on a screen for long amounts of time.
500 rated blitz player be better than 1000 rated rapid players from my experience. its not even close.
From 0-1800 rating Blitz is harder, but not after.
https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/#Chesscom_Rating_vs_FIDE_and_USCF
heloo
Play blitz for the excitement of it, not the rating. I enjoy the frantic scramble at the end, if I make it that far. I play around 800 and don't know much chess, but I do notice that 800 rated players are aware of tactics, have opening ideas, and immediately pounce on mistakes. I look at most of my games with the game report, and I would say it's unusual to see accuracies in the 90's on either side. Typical report is "Wild with both sides having many chances to win" which is a polite way of saying "frantic mistake-laden thrashing ending on time" 
MariaGoldenberg09 wrote:
uubuuh, and if you always loose and your rating is little and it’s getting more more and more little?
Not sure of what your question is, but I do play badly for stretches where my rating drops down into the 600's and I start winning again, in spite of myself. I say the obvious many times, the chess.com rating just serves to find you a well-matched opponent - it is not really a significant measure to wonder much about.
Yeah they're definately harder in blitz it's not you.
Also I've been playing D4 I feel like it's Definately way more smooth than the E4 opening. It just flows so much better.
Learn E4 so you know what to expect when it's played against you, and once you get a good grasp swap over to D4
nightowl819 wrote:
Yeah they're definately harder in blitz it's not you.
Also I've been playing D4 I feel like it's Definately way more smooth than the E4 opening. It just flows so much better.
Learn E4 so you know what to expect when it's played against you, and once you get a good grasp swap over to D4
nah 1.e4 for life
I play 1.e4 and look how high my blitz is