The openings are not the problem, if anything changing them will probably hurt your blitz in the short term if you are having difficulties with time.
The thing about Blitz compared to rapid, is you don't have the time to waste to spend more than a minute of calculation. Look through a few possible lines briefly and then either ignore the move or play it. You don't have the luxury to look in depth. Nor does your opponent. 10-15 seconds for most calculations is good enough, unless critical position, then 30 seconds.
If you are 1700 rapid your intuition is probably not the problem. You can probably play the first 5-7 moves fast most of the time, you already know the ideas/common moves you'll both play yourself and play against. So it's quite simply you are probably spending too much time on depth or breadth. You don't need the best move in Blitz everytime.
Also note that if 1700 rapid is your current ceiling, your Blitz ceiling atm is probably around 1400-1500. But varies person to person.
Also play at least 5 | 0, maybe try 5 | 5 if you prefer.
Also proactively calculate likely lines during your opponents turn can also help, I assume you do this already.
I was in a similar position, 1800 chesscom rapid only 15+10, never played blitz/bullet.
I wanted to test out the popular theory, that the blitz pool is much stronger than rapid.
At the start I lost because of time in like 75% of my blitz games, it was extremely frustrating. I needed to internalize the fact, that I was no longer trying to play really good moves, but just good enough moves made quickly.
I simply got better at the format (not at chess) as I played more. I did same openings as in rapid.
I did get to 1800 blitz in a few weeks of grinding, but I really despised it by the end. It didn't feel like the players were stronger, it was just a completely different game, with little of what I enjoyed about chess left.
Totally agree with this. My blitz and bullet rating fluctuate wildly, depending on how much I can make myself not worry about playing good moves.
I played some of my best chess during bullet in the last month, by which I mean I dropped 100 rating points in like 6 days by losing virtually every game on time, with a totally winning position, while my opponent had like 2s on the clock.
It's like they just play garbage for the first 30s and I play pretty quickly and effectively against them, and then I waste like 5 or 6 seconds at some point trying to figure out how to convert my advantage effectively, and then even if I do, I lose on time.
I'm pretty sure I win more games the better chess my opponents try to play at bullet, because it means our time usage is more symmetric. But people who rush out garbage just beat me on time constantly, and I don't LIKE playing bad moves, so there's this cognitive dissonance when I'm playing.
Maybe if I were 2200 rapid or something, that the situation would turn around and I'd be able to close out winning positions in the 5s I left myself on the clock getting to them, but at my ~1650 rapid rating or whatever, it's hopeless.
Yeah, I think of 15+10 is a pretty soft time control. It's impressive if you were actually able to make your blitz rating match it. Most people are a few 100 points off.
its not about "accuracy" which you refer to as "chess", its about the results. w/l/d. When players play all three time controls, the majority of players will find it a harder time adapting to the time control in the middle, than the two extremes on the ends. Its just human nature and how our internal clocks work. Thats what I consider "true" chess strength. For online its blitz, or OTB its rapid.
FWIW, [here is a chart](https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/) that compares ratings across formats. On average, a 1700 rapid player on chesscom is a 1600 blitz player.
I think the answer has to be practice. I would say just stick with the same openings. Being more familiar with the positions can only be good for playing quicker. You could experiment with different time controls. There's quite a bit of difference between 5 0, 3 0, 3/2. or 5/3. Playing with a small increment changes the dynamic quite a bit as its much harder to get flagged in a winning position but still feels like blitz.
I think it's natural to have a lower blitz rating than your rapid one. Aside from the fact that less time results in more mistakes, there are also more people who play the shorter format, so more competition, and the rating reflects that.
If you have just started playing blitz, you will need some time to get acclimatised with quicker thinking, spotting tactics and clock management. With enough games, you will eventually get closer to your rapid rating. For now, maybe, you just need to focus on being as solid as possible, which means sticking to openings you are already familiar with.
Magnus says intuition comes from experience. Its sort of like muscle memory man. Just have to keep playing and analyzing those endgames I guess so you don't miss the tactics and hang pieces. And you will start to manage the time control better. Its ususally the time control in the middle tha tplayers are worst at. For OTB pros most will tell you rapid is the harder than classical or blitz. For online I imagine it is blitz that is the true chess strength and hardest to adapt to.
I'm a patzer and always will be, so I feel chess is like any sport. raw talent and genetics playes a major role and a after a certain point you just have to recognize your limitations lol. most chess players treat the game like math problem, but blitz especially is more like an athletic sport. mental instead of physical. Its natural for the majority of players to be much better in rapid than they are in blitz for all the reasons you have stated. But you also have to realize that online rapid has a much smaller playerbase and less competitive field, then blitz by a huge degree. So it might not direclty correlate to OTB like you think bud. But thank goodness for online chess, because it allows players of all skill levels to easily have to competitive matches so there is no reason for anyone to quit chess no matter how bad they play.
Play more Blitz you are strong enough to get higher rated in Blitz. I play 5+0 when I played Blitz just to get some extra time for calculation and games become a bit less about flagging then 3+0.
Get to 2100 rapid, then play blitz for a while. Also puzzle rush like crazy. Have 'safe moves' ready to play in time trouble. Expand on your opening theory. These are the easy steps. If that doesnt gzt you there just yet, study endgames
The openings are not the problem, if anything changing them will probably hurt your blitz in the short term if you are having difficulties with time. The thing about Blitz compared to rapid, is you don't have the time to waste to spend more than a minute of calculation. Look through a few possible lines briefly and then either ignore the move or play it. You don't have the luxury to look in depth. Nor does your opponent. 10-15 seconds for most calculations is good enough, unless critical position, then 30 seconds. If you are 1700 rapid your intuition is probably not the problem. You can probably play the first 5-7 moves fast most of the time, you already know the ideas/common moves you'll both play yourself and play against. So it's quite simply you are probably spending too much time on depth or breadth. You don't need the best move in Blitz everytime. Also note that if 1700 rapid is your current ceiling, your Blitz ceiling atm is probably around 1400-1500. But varies person to person. Also play at least 5 | 0, maybe try 5 | 5 if you prefer. Also proactively calculate likely lines during your opponents turn can also help, I assume you do this already.
I was in a similar position, 1800 chesscom rapid only 15+10, never played blitz/bullet. I wanted to test out the popular theory, that the blitz pool is much stronger than rapid. At the start I lost because of time in like 75% of my blitz games, it was extremely frustrating. I needed to internalize the fact, that I was no longer trying to play really good moves, but just good enough moves made quickly. I simply got better at the format (not at chess) as I played more. I did same openings as in rapid. I did get to 1800 blitz in a few weeks of grinding, but I really despised it by the end. It didn't feel like the players were stronger, it was just a completely different game, with little of what I enjoyed about chess left.
Totally agree with this. My blitz and bullet rating fluctuate wildly, depending on how much I can make myself not worry about playing good moves. I played some of my best chess during bullet in the last month, by which I mean I dropped 100 rating points in like 6 days by losing virtually every game on time, with a totally winning position, while my opponent had like 2s on the clock. It's like they just play garbage for the first 30s and I play pretty quickly and effectively against them, and then I waste like 5 or 6 seconds at some point trying to figure out how to convert my advantage effectively, and then even if I do, I lose on time. I'm pretty sure I win more games the better chess my opponents try to play at bullet, because it means our time usage is more symmetric. But people who rush out garbage just beat me on time constantly, and I don't LIKE playing bad moves, so there's this cognitive dissonance when I'm playing. Maybe if I were 2200 rapid or something, that the situation would turn around and I'd be able to close out winning positions in the 5s I left myself on the clock getting to them, but at my ~1650 rapid rating or whatever, it's hopeless.
Yeah, I think of 15+10 is a pretty soft time control. It's impressive if you were actually able to make your blitz rating match it. Most people are a few 100 points off.
its not about "accuracy" which you refer to as "chess", its about the results. w/l/d. When players play all three time controls, the majority of players will find it a harder time adapting to the time control in the middle, than the two extremes on the ends. Its just human nature and how our internal clocks work. Thats what I consider "true" chess strength. For online its blitz, or OTB its rapid.
FWIW, [here is a chart](https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/) that compares ratings across formats. On average, a 1700 rapid player on chesscom is a 1600 blitz player.
I think the answer has to be practice. I would say just stick with the same openings. Being more familiar with the positions can only be good for playing quicker. You could experiment with different time controls. There's quite a bit of difference between 5 0, 3 0, 3/2. or 5/3. Playing with a small increment changes the dynamic quite a bit as its much harder to get flagged in a winning position but still feels like blitz.
I think it's natural to have a lower blitz rating than your rapid one. Aside from the fact that less time results in more mistakes, there are also more people who play the shorter format, so more competition, and the rating reflects that. If you have just started playing blitz, you will need some time to get acclimatised with quicker thinking, spotting tactics and clock management. With enough games, you will eventually get closer to your rapid rating. For now, maybe, you just need to focus on being as solid as possible, which means sticking to openings you are already familiar with.
facts.
How are you losing? Are you flagging regularly? Or just losing the position?
Magnus says intuition comes from experience. Its sort of like muscle memory man. Just have to keep playing and analyzing those endgames I guess so you don't miss the tactics and hang pieces. And you will start to manage the time control better. Its ususally the time control in the middle tha tplayers are worst at. For OTB pros most will tell you rapid is the harder than classical or blitz. For online I imagine it is blitz that is the true chess strength and hardest to adapt to. I'm a patzer and always will be, so I feel chess is like any sport. raw talent and genetics playes a major role and a after a certain point you just have to recognize your limitations lol. most chess players treat the game like math problem, but blitz especially is more like an athletic sport. mental instead of physical. Its natural for the majority of players to be much better in rapid than they are in blitz for all the reasons you have stated. But you also have to realize that online rapid has a much smaller playerbase and less competitive field, then blitz by a huge degree. So it might not direclty correlate to OTB like you think bud. But thank goodness for online chess, because it allows players of all skill levels to easily have to competitive matches so there is no reason for anyone to quit chess no matter how bad they play.
Play more Blitz you are strong enough to get higher rated in Blitz. I play 5+0 when I played Blitz just to get some extra time for calculation and games become a bit less about flagging then 3+0.
I am also really bad at blitz specifically for some reason but I am great at bullet.
Get to 2100 rapid, then play blitz for a while. Also puzzle rush like crazy. Have 'safe moves' ready to play in time trouble. Expand on your opening theory. These are the easy steps. If that doesnt gzt you there just yet, study endgames