My point is that all speeds of chess are "chess" and because someone does well at one speed of chess is not good reason to belittle and disparage players who do well at other speeds of chess.
It is almost always true that players who belittle certain speeds of chess are the same players who could not do well in the type of chess they mock.
It is a matter of taste. I can't see myself taking days for a move. If you let an engine calculate the next move, where is your ability? I also don't function well under severe time pressure. Normally I play 15/10, occasionally 30 (a bit too long for my taste, but once I won on time a 30 minutes game!!!) Before chess online I played chess with a real board with a friend. He took incredibly long, some 30 minutes per move. I told him that if he wanted to keep playing with me we had to use a chess clock
...
It is just plain silly and egotistical to mock a type of chess that is not the speed you like to play.
Gotta remember that next time I read something about correspondence chess being the best form of chess.
CPC is the best form of chess. no pressure, time to think and yer.... but there's a down side-engine users might come in play for feeble players.
Correspondence is not the best form of chess but it very likely produces the games with the least errors. And sometimes the most beautiful games.
It can also be a great teaching tool.
I do not play bullets on the internet. I like them over-the-board where the mouse never slips and my pieces go to the squares I intend them to go ;)
I know players with the opposite preferences, though. My friend prefers network games because he can sit in his favourite chair and nothing disturbs him.
This does not mean one form of playing chess is better than the other. He beats me badly in internet games and I beat him OTB under the same time controls.
You think correspondence chess is slow? I play correspondence shatranj.
There are many, often younger, players who can play bullet or other very fast chess.
I cannot play bullet at all and also cannot and do not play very fast chess. But I admire the players who can.
Some players play best at over-the-board tournament speed.
Some players, [like me] do their best at correspondence chess. [here I refer to correspondence chess without the use of chess engines]
The slower one plays chess, the better the chess game is. [this is a general rule]
Some very beautiful games are played at "slow" time limits.
This does not mean that USCF over-the-board chess "is not chess" just because very often the games themselves are not as high quality as correspondence chess.
It is just mean spirited to say that bullet or speed chess "is not real chess"
It is also just mean spirited to say correspondence chess as played here on chess.com "is not real chess"
Players who mock certain type of chess are very often the players who could not possibly do very well in the type of chess they mock.
I will also add that correspondence chess with the help of chess engines is real chess. It is the type of chess which many mock but those who mock are very usually players who could not ever do very well in that type of chess.
It is just plain silly and egotistical to mock a type of chess that is not the speed you like to play.