The setbacks autopsy

The necessity of opting for quality rather than speed

Meet me, Alex, 23, 1970-rated OTB (Blitz). It happened so that I practically never had any experience of classical chess. Most of my practice came from either online blitz or OTB blitz and rapid tournaments. Last year (October 2022) I finally found myself playing for the University team at the Student Olympics, proudly taking seat at the first table (out of 4). Unsurprisingly I found that classical chess hits rather exceptionally different from the familiar time-controls, as my results were later presented respectively. Despite scoring the horrific 3.5 out of 7 (even though the average opponents rating was slightly less than 2000), the overall significance of certain games was undoubtable.

How Blitz habits changed patterns for classical games

As I haven't had the vital practice in classical controls, I wasn't spending much time in the opening. Having a 30+30 control set on the clock pratically meant a rather dubious rapid for me as I blitzed out the first 15 moves and wandered the hall whilst the opponents spent minutes on each responsible move, keeping the order. Most games I found myself in a worse position with possible tactical opportunities and counterplay after reckless decisions that were not calculated rigorously (if only it was a faster time control with options for time pressure). The constant desire to sharpen position, to sacrifice instinctively without necessary deep calculation of all possible variations, as the time allowed, led to either quick disasters or relentless and agonizing struggle for draw.

The final success that never was

In spite of all the losses, I carried on with resilience. Somehow I mobilized my brain to swap the basic principles and as the positional play took place, I started spending more time as it promised a tangible warp. The critical game (against Rogotskiy Yuriy, 2073 classical OTB) has later shown the weak spots and lack of concentration as the analysis was through.

Although I still believe the game to have been comprehensive, dramatic and thoughtful, postgame analysis showed the obvious mistakes. The time spent on considering 31. Qxf7 compared to 31. Bxe5 and the misleading calculation meant the result for the entire game as after 31. Bxe5 Black would have been doomed. The necessity of double-checking all forced variations when time allows for it became a long-term habit after. The game was however not decisive for our team and as one of the mates said afterwards - "Such games just gotta end in a draw, consider it fate".

As flaws are taken into account, the game remains

Despite the imperfection and sloppy play from both sides considering the time control, chess games are often about critical mistakes made by one side even at top level. Hope the whole first-classical-tournament anxiety background helps you (possible future OTB chess players) understand the tension and what unprepared for classical chess players face once the match begins.