spadel wrote:I disagree with you @Diarouga, but we could discuss this forever and don’t come to a conclusion. Blitz and Bullet are just played in 3+0 and 1+0, that’s how it is.
Bullet is played without increment but that's because it is a shit game mode xD.
3+2 Blitz and 5+3 Blitz games are quite standard, so Blitz definitely isn't 3+0. I'm not even sure 3+0 is Blitz by the way, it might well but Bullet.
5+0 is also common in blitz but playing a 5+0 blitz is just like playing a 3+2 blitz, so the increment doesn't matter.
Blitz without increment can get really silly if one player is way up on the board but almost out of time. There's a reason pros almost always play with increment. At least 1s is a nobrainer imo. 3+2 is probably my blitz time control of choice.
Blitz
Time controls for each player in a game of blitz chess are, according to FIDE, 10 minutes or less per player.[2] This can be played with or without an increment or delay per move—a more recent development due to the influx of digital clocks. Three minutes with a two-second increment is preferred. In the case of time increments, the total time per player for a 60-move game must be 10 minutes or less (hence averaging 10 seconds or less per move).[2]
For the FIDE World Blitz Championship, each player has 3 minutes, plus 2 seconds additional time per move starting from move 1.[3]
you can for example watch streams of Hikaru Nakamura, he is a super GM and plays against many other super GMs frequently and they never play with increment. Also the titled arenas on lichess, which are the largest and highest level frequent online tournaments are without increment.
you can for example watch streams of Hikaru Nakamura, he is a super GM and plays against many other super GMs frequently and they never play with increment. Also the titled arenas on lichess, which are the largest and highest level frequent online tournaments are without increment.
As I said chess.com speed chess championship is played with 5/1, 3/1 and 1/1 games.
By "pros almost always play with increment" I meant that official, high-level blitz tournaments are typically played with increment. I mean, the FIDE world championship isn't exactly a far out kinda tournament is it? I haven't watched chess in a long time, so I'm out of the loop on online chess, but I don't remember ever seeing a live blitz game without increment.
Anyway we are not pro so it does not really matter. I'd much rather play with increment since the quality of play is overall better and this makes it much more interesting to me. For example I can invest a long time (say one minute) to compute a complicated line which gives a winning endgame and convert the endgame on increment, while in a KO setting I would just lose in the endgame if I have to play 20 or 30 moves.
Goodspeed wrote:By "pros almost always play with increment" I meant that official, high-level blitz tournaments are typically played with increment. I mean, the FIDE world championship isn't exactly a far out kinda tournament is it? I haven't watched chess in a long time, so I'm out of the loop on online chess, but I don't remember ever seeing a live blitz game without increment.
yea I agree, but online chess is usually done with different rules from normal games, because you can move much faster due to premove and stuff.
and yea I don‘t mind, if everybody wants to play 3+2 then fine for me
Sure. But I always saw the increment as a safeguard against situations where one player is obviously winning but the other player can stall until their clock runs out, which I don't think should be a thing. So to me it doesn't really matter how fast you can move. A player should always have the opportunity to play out a won position.
Maybe 3+1 would be ok online, as opposed to 3+2 live.
To me it is a feature of Blitz, that you are incentivized to play moves, that are objectively bad, but are difficult to calculate and can easily lead to a quick win, if the opponent is not careful. I play Blitz without increment a lot more aggressive and aim for positions, where my opponent can easily fuck up (but also get an advantage if he finds the correct moves). So I oftentimes end up with a drawn or losing positions eventually, but win because my opponent runs out of time. It‘s just a different game mode and incentivizes different playstyles.
That's still the case with increment. Increment just defends against that pesky situation where you're completely won but lose on time.
I also just don't like blitz to be fair. It makes the game even less strategic.
Goodspeed wrote:That's still the case with increment. Increment just defends against that pesky situation where you're completely won but lose on time.
I also just don't like blitz to be fair. It makes the game even less strategic.
In blitz you rely heavily on pattern recognition and have no time to calculate so it actually favours a good feeling of the position, judgement and intuition over concrete calculation (this also the reason why opening is less significant in blitz by the way).
