Well, the point of correspondence-style chess is that one can
have the time to contemplate one's moves. There are folks that come to these sites and expect quick replies. It may
happen, but more unlikely than not.
Using ChessWorld.net as an example, I know there are players from about 200 different countries. If I was playing from British Columbia with someone in Germany, I believe we're talking about a time zone difference of 10 hours. So, the chances of being on at the same time are fairly slim.
You'll find, too, as one gets older, that blitz-style chess gets harder to concentrate on. I, myself, don't have the patience to have a clock run down quickly and be out of time. I did used to play games with a time period of 30 minutes, but I found that the majority of players want to play at a time limit of up to 10 minutes, or less.
In the meantime, you're sucking wind waiting for someone to show up.
I used to play too quickly at correspondence chess, but I take more time now. I still lose games, of course, but I feel I've improved somewhat. I've taken hours at a move. Not all at one go
. I'll come back if I don't have a good solution. That's the beauty of this style of chess.
It is something one has to learn to get better at it. I guess it depends at how strong your drive to play and improve is.
Robert Gentel wrote:
My biggest chess weakness is carelessness from not examining the board well enough and it sounds like the correspondence style would be less forgiving of the mistakes that will arise from quick play.
Yes, definitely, if your opponent takes their time.
Everyone is still going to make mistakes, but checking the board to see that there are no pieces to be easily captured can be learned. You have to sit on those hands, though!