Difference between fast and slow games

[hyperpape]

Am I the only person who plays blitz and slower games on the same account? I have noticed in my 25:00 min automatch games my opponents often play faster than I do. My last two wins, I ran out of main time while my opponents had 10:00 and 15:00 left on the clock respectively.

I've started playing both on the same account. I used to be very careful to separate the accounts (my slow play account was one or two ranks higher). I rarely play slow games anymore (mostly 1 + 5x10 and 10 + 5x20), but for awhile I was using both and it's my old "main" account.

[Marcus]

Am I the only person who plays blitz and slower games on the same account? I have noticed in my 25:00 min automatch games my opponents often play faster than I do. My last two wins, I ran out of main time while my opponents had 10:00 and 15:00 left on the clock respectively.

I'm to lazy to create another account ... I pay all my games, on all time settings, from the same account.

[oren]

Am I the only person who plays blitz and slower games on the same account? I have noticed in my 25:00 min automatch games my opponents often play faster than I do. My last two wins, I ran out of main time while my opponents had 10:00 and 15:00 left on the clock respectively.

No, I play them on the same account. I'm too lazy to switch.

[snorri]

I haven't tested this recently, but the last time I did, I was about 3 stones stronger on slow games on IGS. On KGS it was about the same either way. Go figure.

I think it's not just about you. It's about the population of opponents. Some people only play fast and some only slow. It could be that on some servers the stronger players play faster games whereas on others they play slower.

As I recall, what I concluded was that on IGS, my level of play deteriorated in faster games. More mistakes, more misreads, more time losses. But my opponents did not seem affected by this.

On KGS, in faster games, my play deteriorated in faster games. More mistakes, more misreads, more time losses. But I was still okay because the blitz players played such terrible openings that it was like I started with a handicap, so it evened out.

On Tygem and WBaduk, players just seem to play fast regardless of the limits, and I sometimes fall into the bad habit of getting caught up in their pace. But I haven't played there consistently enough to know what may stable rating would be (assuming it would even stabilize.)

For me, there's a threshold somewhere, and if I play faster than that, everything falls apart. It may have to do with whether I have time to estimate the score. Anyway, I'm very aware of when this is happening, so I don't feel the need to dwell on it.

Many high dans (Aguilar, Shikshin, etc.) have mentioned that they really need tournaments and IRL play to improve. It could that even if they can muster the discipline to take online games seriously, there is no way to get their opponents to do the same. There is something lost in not being able to get your opponent's best game, I guess. IRL games don't solve it completely (there are go clubs that meet in pubs, after all ), but maybe the problem is lessened.

[Toge]

What does it mean if slow accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the fast accounts rank?
What does it mean if fast accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the slow accounts rank?
Assume the ranks are based on enough many games to be more or less accurate.

- It means exactly what the question indicates. Even the underlying premise of asking the question implies that playing a slow game and playing a fast game are two discrete possibilities. What constitutes playing a good game on either fast or slow time setting cannot be applied to the other, hence the difference in rank.

En elephant is bigger than a mouse. What does it say about the elephant or the mouse? Nothing.

[hyperpape]

What does it mean if slow accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the fast accounts rank?
What does it mean if fast accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the slow accounts rank?
Assume the ranks are based on enough many games to be more or less accurate.

- It means exactly what the question indicates. Even the underlying premise of asking the question implies that playing a slow game and playing a fast game are two discrete possibilities. What constitutes playing a good game on either fast or slow time setting cannot be applied to the other, hence the difference in rank.

En elephant is bigger than a mouse. What does it say about the elephant or the mouse? Nothing.

Whaaaa?

[ez4u]

I don't know if this is relevant at all, but curiously on the free chess server, where they record blitz and standard ratings separately, the average blitz rating is several hundred ELO points lower than the average standard rating.

But now it starts getting more confusing... How should one interpret this? People are losing more when they play blitz? But then who is winning ) How can the time setting affect the average rating?
Maybe it is because of the ratio of draws in chess ???

Good question!
@danielm - Is your observation based on hard data covering all players on the server, or is anecdotal, e.g. based on you looking at the player list? Is the differentiation of blitz and standard automated so that all games and players are classified consistently?

[danielm]

I don't know if this is relevant at all, but curiously on the free chess server, where they record blitz and standard ratings separately, the average blitz rating is several hundred ELO points lower than the average standard rating.

But now it starts getting more confusing... How should one interpret this? People are losing more when they play blitz? But then who is winning ) How can the time setting affect the average rating?
Maybe it is because of the ratio of draws in chess ???

Good question!
@danielm - Is your observation based on hard data covering all players on the server, or is anecdotal, e.g. based on you looking at the player list? Is the differentiation of blitz and standard automated so that all games and players are classified consistently?

Yes, it's automated. FICS shows the average ratings for each category, so it's not anecdotal. It probably has something to do with a lot more blitz games being played, so any deflation effect would be more pronounced. Still I always found it odd how some people could maintain a blitz rating about as high as their standard rating.

[Joaz Banbeck]

What does it mean if slow accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the fast accounts rank?

He is old.

What does it mean if fast accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the slow accounts rank?

He is young.

[entropi]

What does it mean if slow accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the fast accounts rank?

He is old.

bitter truth

[Psychee]

What does it mean if slow accounts rank is much higher (>3 stones) than the fast accounts rank?

He is old.

bitter truth

no...

[ez4u]

@danielm - Is your observation based on hard data covering all players on the server, or is anecdotal, e.g. based on you looking at the player list? Is the differentiation of blitz and standard automated so that all games and players are classified consistently?

Yes, it's automated. FICS shows the average ratings for each category, so it's not anecdotal. It probably has something to do with a lot more blitz games being played, so any deflation effect would be more pronounced. Still I always found it odd how some people could maintain a blitz rating about as high as their standard rating.

This is the output of the "statistics" command just a little while ago. We can see that the situation is not so clearcut. Yes the average Blitz rating is lower than the average Standard rating for humans (hmean), but it is higher for computers (cmean). In addition, the average Lightning rating (sort of super Blitz) is higher than the Standard rating for both humans and computers (let's not get started on Wild and Bughouse ). So I have a feeling that the FICS rating systems are not going to provide us too much fuel for a reasoned discussion.

Server rating statistics:

mean sd hmean hsd cmean csd
Blitz 1389.02 275.14 1385.53 268.47 2248.04 474.92
Standard 1571.39 228.46 1566.20 218.44 2166.70 456.32
Lightning 1637.53 277.01 1623.07 251.04 2339.15 489.20
Wild 1909.60 219.03 1895.15 199.35 2271.00 343.44
Bughouse 1829.64 347.72 1829.64 347.72 0.00 0.00
Crazyhouse 1802.21 297.16 1801.92 297.37 1951.00 0.00
Suicide 1864.63 238.50 1846.95 218.32 2235.83 325.68
Losers 1904.84 186.47 1904.84 186.47 0.00 0.00
Atomic 1933.98 293.90 1933.98 293.90 0.00 0.00

PS - Sorry, this is just a cut and paste. I am in a hurry at the moment and do not know how to format this well!

[Joaz Banbeck]

...

Server rating statistics:

Code: Select all

              mean     sd      hmean     hsd     cmean     csd
Blitz       1389.02  275.14   1385.53  268.47   2248.04  474.92
Standard    1571.39  228.46   1566.20  218.44   2166.70  456.32
Lightning   1637.53  277.01   1623.07  251.04   2339.15  489.20
Wild        1909.60  219.03   1895.15  199.35   2271.00  343.44
Bughouse    1829.64  347.72   1829.64  347.72      0.00    0.00
Crazyhouse  1802.21  297.16   1801.92  297.37   1951.00    0.00
Suicide     1864.63  238.50   1846.95  218.32   2235.83  325.68
Losers      1904.84  186.47   1904.84  186.47      0.00    0.00
Atomic      1933.98  293.90   1933.98  293.90      0.00    0.00

[ez4u]

@Joaz - Thanks! I'll (try to) remember that.

[danielm]

@danielm - Is your observation based on hard data covering all players on the server, or is anecdotal, e.g. based on you looking at the player list? Is the differentiation of blitz and standard automated so that all games and players are classified consistently?

Yes, it's automated. FICS shows the average ratings for each category, so it's not anecdotal. It probably has something to do with a lot more blitz games being played, so any deflation effect would be more pronounced. Still I always found it odd how some people could maintain a blitz rating about as high as their standard rating.

This is the output of the "statistics" command just a little while ago. We can see that the situation is not so clearcut. Yes the average Blitz rating is lower than the average Standard rating for humans (hmean), but it is higher for computers (cmean). In addition, the average Lightning rating (sort of super Blitz) is higher than the Standard rating for both humans and computers (let's not get started on Wild and Bughouse ). So I have a feeling that the FICS rating systems are not going to provide us too much fuel for a reasoned discussion.

Server rating statistics:

Code: Select all

              mean     sd      hmean     hsd     cmean     csd
Blitz       1389.02  275.14   1385.53  268.47   2248.04  474.92
Standard    1571.39  228.46   1566.20  218.44   2166.70  456.32
Lightning   1637.53  277.01   1623.07  251.04   2339.15  489.20
Wild        1909.60  219.03   1895.15  199.35   2271.00  343.44
Bughouse    1829.64  347.72   1829.64  347.72      0.00    0.00
Crazyhouse  1802.21  297.16   1801.92  297.37   1951.00    0.00
Suicide     1864.63  238.50   1846.95  218.32   2235.83  325.68
Losers      1904.84  186.47   1904.84  186.47      0.00    0.00
Atomic      1933.98  293.90   1933.98  293.90      0.00    0.00

PS - Sorry, this is just a cut and paste. I am in a hurry at the moment and do not know how to format this well!

Yes, it seems that the more popular a section, the lower the ratings are, so perhaps it's really just deflation which becomes more pronounced the more games are played (though I'm not entirely sure if standard is more popular than lightning).

That computers score higher in blitz is completely expected though, as that is their specialty (like 9x9 for Go engines). Still it's odd that there is an even jump of 100 points from lightning to standard for computers, if the blitz section is really so severely deflated.