Forums

blitz seems way harder than rapid

Sort:
Oldest
hanweihehai

i do think classic chess harder than rapid ,rapid harder than biltz, beacause with more time ,it's hard to play wrong ,you need to be real good to win, 4 hours chess , you still win,that's difficlut

Dabs2

Blitz is much harder than rapid or bullet. 

tygxc

Playing rapid helps to play blitz better.
Playing blitz does not help to play rapid better.

LeoTSimoes26

Normally the blitz rating is higher than the rapid for most players, isnt?

Jalex13
My rapid is higher than blitz.
LeoTSimoes26
Jalex13 escreveu:
My rapid is higher than blitz.

But you probably play more rapid and maybe is not used to the time management or tricks of the blitz. I say that because even if you check the leaderboard you see that bullet has more high rated players than blitz, which has more high rated players than rapid, etc. I think that since you can win with tricks and by running the opponents time out you dont rely only on your chess skills. Besides that I also think there is much more people playing blitz and bullet therefore statistically you will have more "weaker" opponents in these categories. I already had a 2000 rating in blitz, but I do not think I am near this in rapid or classical.

LeoTSimoes26

I might be wrong, it is just an opinion based in what I see and what the leaderboard of chess.com shows. https://www.chess.com/leaderboard

TheRealBlueSwan

There's no real question that at the lower levels and intermediate levels, the pool of blitz players is much stronger the the pool of rapid players in the same ratings range.

Personally, I have played roughly an equal amount of rapid and blitz over the last few weeks, but whereas I had to work really hard to get my blitz rating to 1400, I had no real issue getting my rapid rating to around 1550 playing pretty casually. I will say that a 1400 blitz player is usually BETTER than a 1550 rapid player. I will happily play a dubious gambit against a 1550 rapid player, but against a 1400 blitz player I will usually get punished for this.

I think that most players in this ratings range will tend to have a rapid rating around 200 points higher than their blitz rating.

dude0812
kpcollins86 wrote:
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

Rapid ratings are inflated compared to blitz ratings. What you are experiencing is normal.

dude0812
TheRealBlueSwan wrote:

There's no real question that at the lower levels and intermediate levels, the pool of blitz players is much stronger the the pool of rapid players in the same ratings range.

Personally, I have played roughly an equal amount of rapid and blitz over the last few weeks, but whereas I had to work really hard to get my blitz rating to 1400, I had no real issue getting my rapid rating to around 1550 playing pretty casually. I will say that a 1400 blitz player is usually BETTER than a 1550 rapid player. I will happily play a dubious gambit against a 1550 rapid player, but against a 1400 blitz player I will usually get punished for this.

I think that most players in this ratings range will tend to have a rapid rating around 200 points higher than their blitz rating.

In my experience the difference was also around 200 points at that level. Being rated 800-900 blitz and 1200 rapid is also normal, the difference is bigger at that level. At around 2000 level blitz and rapid ratings equalize.

PopcornSC
B1ZMARK wrote:

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.

This is wrong. It is easier to get a higher rating and a better percentile in rapid. The hardest format is bullet, which is probably the most played time control on the site. The more people play, the harder it will tend to be to get a higher rating and higher percentile.

 

Edit: Looking at your rating, it seems you are facing the effects of being near the top of the rating pool. Your position is much more understandable but still wrong. It's harder for you to continue to gain rating because you're in the very top percentile which means not many people have a higher rating than you and points become hard to come by because you're not good enough in comparison to the other players around this rating to have a high enough win rate to continue increasing your rating even though you might be better than others with a 2200 rating. However, the bulk of the player base has inflated ratings in comparison to their blitz rating.

sndeww
PopcornSC wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:

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.

This is wrong. It is easier to get a higher rating and a better percentile in rapid. The hardest format is bullet, which is probably the most played time control on the site. The more people play, the harder it will tend to be to get a higher rating and higher percentile.

 

Edit: Looking at your rating, it seems you are facing the effects of being near the top of the rating pool. Your position is much more understandable but still wrong. It's harder for you to continue to gain rating because you're in the very top percentile which means not many people have a higher rating than you and points become hard to come by because you're not good enough in comparison to the other players around this rating to have a high enough win rate to continue increasing your rating even though you might be better than others with a 2200 rating. However, the bulk of the player base has inflated ratings in comparison to their blitz rating.

Well, it is just what I've experienced. From when I was 1100 to now, my blitz rating has always been either significantly or clearly higher than my rapid.

TheNateGecko

E4>D4

Impyre2

The way I think about it is:

The more time you use per move, the better you play, and the better your rating. So it makes sense that your ratings should look something like daily>rapid>blitz>bullet , EG 1350 - 1200 - 750 - 350

It also makes sense that other people would have similar looking ratings (assuming they played a little of each type). This means that the skill levels of players gets condensed at shorter time controls... If you're rated 1000 rapid, trying to reach 1000 blitz would be like trying to beat 1300-1400 rapid rated players.

Prince_Rain

really

magipi
Impyre2 wrote:

The way I think about it is:

The more time you use per move, the better you play, and the better your rating. So it makes sense that your ratings should look something like daily>rapid>blitz>bullet , EG 1350 - 1200 - 750 - 350

Not only it does not make sense, it is also completely untrue. This is absolutely not how chess ratings work. Ratings are based only on your results, not on a mystical "how well you play".

IloveShumai
I just can’t win 😫
Endorfinas

To me its totally the other way around. Well first of all,im an amateur. 2 months ago i did know the movements,except of one,passed pawn. 

So,my experience is the opposite. I have way better performance,and win better rivals, on 3' specially on Arena. Idk why ,if i get more competitive on arena. 

But on the opposite,on those 10' matches,well a thing i need to work is my patience and obvious things as noticing where the rival is threatening and what,after moving. Not always i do this. But there are this matches when the rival does moves or have an accuracy,thats suspicious. I mean,i should in theory have better performance in 10' than in 3'. The engine must suspect sth as eventually i was given a bit of points "due to suspecting of rival's cheating". Whatever,i need to focus on my patience. And in the other guy pieces,not just in my plan 

 

 

Oh and i absolutly love those 3 days games. That feel as real chess. I need to go to a club RL,even It discourages me that i have met this Game,in the sense to enjoy playing, late. It also discourages me what i have listened about players in clubs having memorizated like first 20 moves,and just waiting others mistake. Like ,  if after both guys memorized 20 moves there are no mistakes,then real chess starts. I read this,idk to what point is that real or not.

Whatever i will continue playing It. 

youthofthegalaxy

After so many years you are still 700 at blitz. Chess is def not your game.

masterius77

I think the talent pool in blitz is just as strong as rapid, however I think it seems stronger because a. You're playing more games so it's easier to go on losing streaks, b. There's more blunders being made on both sides, however if one person has a better opening, their middle game should be stronger by default, c. Most people have a generally lower blitz rating than their rapid because most people play better chess when they have a chance to think about moves. My blitz is abysmal compared to my rapid, and not because I'm playing better players. It's because I suck at thinking quickly.

Forums
Forum Legend
Following
New Comments
Locked Topic
Pinned Topic