Miki wrote on 12/26/08 at 23:00:24:


My point is that one should avoid such choices. You neglect this, which seems to be a common sophism for time trouble addicts. Your time management does not necessarily mean a huge disadvantage, especially if you're a time trouble beast. But it still means that you give the opening more attention than the middle game and endgame and that certainly causes a lack of balance in your play. No smart logic can argue against this.
Anyhow, against opponents that apply your time management I apply mine: I make sure I have 5-10 minutes more left on the clock, use your time to get into the position, will complicate around move 30 and 9 times out of 10 will reap the fruits in the form of some decisive tactics - assuming that we are of about equal strength. So I wish you good luck with your satisfactory position around move 20 - I rather have the win.

@ Stigma: keeping pace with your opponent it does not mean that one should always use less time than the opponent. Neither does it mean that one should rush out moves if the opponent does. It means that one should not spend too much time on the opening against speedy players. Later one will need that time in a critical position. Several instructors have pointed out how important it is to recognize a critical position in ones game; that's the point the player should invest time regardless of the opponent. But one cannot do that if one uses a lot of time on decisions in the opening that are not critical at all.

Miki wrote on 12/26/08 at 23:00:24:


This suggests you learn your opening theory the wrong way - namely by heart. If you have prepared your openings well you even understand where your pieces have to go the etc. the first 15 moves or so if your opponents deviate. One should not figure out such things behind the board.
In the case one really gets caught in unknown theory - something that has happened very rarely to me last 25 years, despite of my bad memory - one can fall back on the general recipe, something I gave in my previous post: activate your pieces, castle, place one or two pawns in the centre, in short play according to elementary opening principles. If one also watches out for some tactics there is no need for excessive timespending (wasting?!) in the opening.

Btw all these thoughts are not mine. They stem from all kinds of chess manuals, some of them several decades old.

MNb wrote on 12/26/08 at 21:05:30:

True. Also, it does not make sense to rush your moves just to keep up with your opponent's pace and end up in an inferior position in which all the time in the world wouldn't help you.
And if I had to choose between playing strong (and spending lots of time on only seemingly unimportant nuances) or routinely playing out my moves just to keep my clock high I would always choose the first option.

Obviously, what works for me, doesn't have to work for you or someone else. In 90% of my longer games I spend at least 20-30 minutes more then my opponent on the first phase of the game (on opening and early middlegame). 
According to you that would mean that I am almost always at huge disadvantage but I usually have more then enough compensation in form of a satisfactory position. Of course, I am not immune to time troubles but I actually don't face them as often as one might think, simply because it's much easier to play when I have already acquired a satisfactory position from the opening and worked out my future plan(s) for the position.
To you, losing a won position because of time trouble is embarrassing. To me, it's much more embarrassing to lose after having suffered most of the game because of playing opening moves routinely.

And it does not have to do with my opening preparation, I mean quite a few of my opponents don't even follow theory as deep as I have learned it - in that case it's even more important to think hard from the very beginning.

MNb wrote on 12/26/08 at 01:42:06:

I guess everyone has it's own rules about time management but I think it's completely wrong to compare my time to that of my opponent's and try to follow him.
What if he is an extremely fast player (or knows his theory much better then you)? You surely wouldn't want to follow that pace...
Also, most people claim that one shouldn't spend too much time in the opening so that he has enough for the critical moments. I'd like to ask them: would you prefer to have an inferior position with plenty of time on the clock or decent position with let's say half of your time spent?
I think that it's not too wise to come up with any general advices about how much time to spend. There are so many factors which correlate with the time management.
Obviously, one is going to play faster if he is playing some typical middlegame or his favorite opening/line.
But what if your opponent leads you to the completely unknown path? Would you really want to follow his tempo and soon find yourself on the verge of defeat? 
Key thing is to objectively analyse after the game where exactly and WHY did you spend so much time so that you try improve that area. 

I agree that playing some blitz can be helpful to the tactical vision and confidence when low on time but playing too much blitz can definitely harm your game, IMO. It's because on the subconscious level you might adopt some strategies that are not really correct and advisable for a longer game.
Also, I always play blitz with the increment so that I have enough time to finish off my opponent in the endgame. It can be very frustrating to lose the very well played and completely won game. Also, I analyse with the comp EACH AND EVERY blitz game (even the won ones) I play on the internet and when I have clearly found where I went wrong I write it down in a word document in a form of: "Don't do xyz anymore" or in a form of a reminder of what I have to do so that I never lose that way again: "Analyse line xyz because you suck in it" etc. etc.
I go over these self-advices from time to time.
It would be even better to insert a diagram for every position where you went terribly wrong but I am not patient enough to do that, so it's only in a written form. (But usually I vividly remember the game when I go through the advices)

(sort of OT)   

I was already accustomed to a steady stream of comments on the order of "This line might give White decent chances in internet blitz," "I have had good results with this in internet blitz," "This move has been giving me trouble in internet blitz," "I am going to test this opening in internet blitz" and "I haven't studied this variation, but I gave it up after trying it a few times in internet blitz."  Internet blitz:  jack-of-all-trades and touchstone of everything!  In this case (after a couple of mentions of "IB" in this thread) I can't help but think of (a) a friend of mine who gets in time trouble very often although he has played about 10,000 blitz games on ICC, and (b) the fact that I used to get in time trouble a lot despite the fact that I was, I would say, a pretty decent blitz player.  In (b), though, I am basically referring to OTB blitz, so maybe the "internet" part would have made all the difference ...

Have you considered correspondence chess?


Just kidding.

It's hard for me (or anyone else) to know why you have problems with time trouble. Maybe your opening knowledge is not satisfactory and you have to start thinking too soon? Maybe you aren't comfortable with the positions that arise after the openings you play (this could be fixed by playing numerous blitz games and getting used to them). Maybe your thoughts are focused too much on variations only instead of the game plan? Maybe you aren't good with tactics therefore missing the decisive winning lines and dragging the won positions forever? Maybe you are scared of making a mistake (which usually happens because of fear of losing)? Maybe you strive for perfection instead of being practical? Etc., etc.
So many reasons why someone enter the time trouble. You are the only one who can find the right answer...

Stigma wrote on 12/24/08 at 23:44:59:


Presumably, playing lots of faster games would also have the benefit of strengthening your intuition, which would help you to feel the better continuations and not spend so much time mulling over the options...

I'll keep my eyes open for any good answers to this one! 

Platitudes like "Postponing a decision doesn't necessarily improve it" and "I won't give any advice about what to do if you are in time trouble, since this situation shouldn't arise" (both from Nunn: Secrets of Practical Chess) have not helped me. Best coverage I've seen was in Krogius' "Chess Psychology", where he discussed with a sympathetic voice the various psychological factors that lead to time trouble, the pecularities of play in time trouble, and various concrete training suggestions. Interestingly he claimed to have found that players who started playing tournament chess late (I think age 11 was his cutoff-point) were MUCH more prone to time trouble.

My strategy right now is to play the openings faster and try to be less fascinated by all my options in the early middlegame (if they're all OK just pick one, dammit!).

Btw. the one really useful thing I have done about my time trouble was to play lots of bullet games over a 1-year period, which dramatically improved my OTB play when already in time trouble. When I sensed that I had gotten the maximum effect I could out of bullet, I stopped playing it again. Training regularly with easy to intermediate level tactical patterns to stay sharp also helps in this regard. But this is just a band-aid, not a cure.