There might be some debate, and even question in my mind, as to what constitutes “chess skill.” The two areas of the game that I have studied the most are tactics and endgames, especially king and pawn endings, and consequently I can pick up on ideas in these areas very quickly. These two areas are “intuitive” for me in the sense that they are more automatic. Someone who spends a couple minutes thinking about their move might make the same move that I would, but for some of these positions I would only need a few seconds.
From my perspective, a speed game is more of a measure of a person’s chess skill because it shows what they know intuitively. From my perspective, someone who is good at analyzing can compensate for less intuition in a longer game. I see the flip side argument to this, where you could say that in a longer game, chess skill consists of a person’s intuition and knowledge combined with an ability to analyze the game well.
Maybe I take this position because I get my best results at faster time controls.
Speed chess may make some people more impulsive, but it also helps for tournament time scrambles. I think that people who don’t play speed chess negatively impact their tournament chess results.
There is also the enjoyment factor. Given the choice between more rounds at a faster time control or fewer rounds with a longer time control, I think that I would have much more fun with the faster time control.
I think that about 4 weeks ago I was playing my best chess that I ever played. Then I got sick, so now I feel that my chess skill is a little off.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
Sent from my iPhone
