sorry folks, i'm not a forum regular so i don't know if this topic has been "done to death".

i play the occasional live chess game and i wanted to get some other opinions. personally, i don't like super-fast games - such as 1 minute games. for me, it doesn't even really feel like chess. i think that in 1 minute, the game can't be 'won' but a player will run out of time.

sure, i think speed chess is great. i'm happy to play a 5 minute game ... it's fast, exciting and a real result is possible. but games like 1-2 minutes aren't about thinking, it's about who survives the clock longest.

what do others think?

I really prefer10 minute games myself and just will not put myself thru games by people who take an hour or more.   I like chess but I've got better things to do with my life.   As for one minute games. I don't like them  but I suppose people with quick reflexes and computers would do good at them.

By good computers i mean with a good internet connection and not other programs slowing the CPU down.

My absolute bare minimum is a 3 minute game, although I prefer 5-10 minute blitz games and almost never venture beyond that 10 minute mark. I completely agree. Bullet games are simply too hectic and reckless for me to actually enjoy the chess.

"I don't like them  but I suppose people with quick reflexes and computers would do good at them." Haha

I've recently bought a book by GM Hikaru Nakamara. His ELO in classical chess is well over 2700 and he definitely belongs in the Super-GM category - but what made me make the purchase was his fondness of bullet 1 minute games.

Nakamura is one of the (if not the) best bullet players on the planet. He writes in the foreword: "To those that say "bullet isn't chess" I reply: "who said it was?"

In his opinion, bullet is an entirely different game save for the fact that you still follow the rules of chess. Better chess players do better in bullet too, but other skills that don't matter so much in regular play also come in to it.

As far as I'm concerned: for real chess I prefer 15 | 10 fischer games with enough time to think and enough increments to win a won game. But bullet is a lot of fun and I think it doesn't hurt regular play.

my .02 $ :).

i agree that it takes a special skill to be good at 1 minute games. but i suppose that's my point ... to me it feels like the clock is your opponent, not the guy on the other side of the board! :)

I'm afraid I am at the age where it takes about a minute to pick a piece up-- never mind what to do with it. Anybody else out there in the same boat?

I don't see it as a battle to see who times out first though. When my opponent makes random moves to try to time me out. I respond with more accurate moves and eventually my opponent would resign before timing out and sometimes i would checkmate them.. Playing 1 minute games are not for everyone. If you play too many bullet chess games you will learn to manage your time. I find long games just too long. On long games I usually take no more than 30seconds- 1 min to move. I don't play bullet chess games anymore since I have gotten used to long games. I play blitz chess games occasionally.

My live chess games are mostly one minute. Due to lag issues, and some problems in the implementation of premove (it really seems to slow the clocks if both players are using it), these require from 2:15 to 3:30 to finish.

If I start a five minute game, I must be prepared to spend fifteen minutes. I need quicker gratification than that!

I think they're riotous fun.  If I want to try play solid chess I'll stay away, but if I want to squeeze out 10 games in-between actually doing stuff at work, I find bullet to be a genius invention!  And, it is a fine feeling when you see combinations in a flash.

What I don't understand is people who consent to 1-minute time controls, and then get irritated when they lose on time.  Personally, I find it hilarious when I pull up one move short from checkmate.

Damn, now I need to play me some...

I hate the idea of losing simply on time alone. Where two people are playing a good match and one person loses simply because of one second more time than the other to be a "low-end" win.  The shortest I do is 5 minutes with +3 sec each turn to rid myself and others of such tactics.  I'd probably be willing to do 3 min +3 sec, but any game that is based on a .01 second difference isn't a game in my book.

2minutes with a second per move is the game I play in live. If you see me - challenge me :)

I can only play about a max of 5 in a row and then my heads pickled :)

        Chess.com   is  really  great  site  ,  many  cool  features  ,  but  only  one  thing ,  when  playing  blitzes  ,  pieces  moves  not  so  good  .  I  loose  many (  winning ) games  because  of  this  problem  .  It  is  very  difficult  to  play   3 , 2  and  1  minute  games  because  of  this  problem .  For  example  i  must  move  piece  from  h5  to  h3  and  piece  stops  on  h4  .  I  am  trying  plaing  with  clicks(not  drag  and  drop)  ,  but  it  is  difficult  too. Other  things  in  live  chess  really  are  good.

am new here, have not figured out how to play a slower game, may not be back, very disappointed in no literture easily availed to inform of if and how to slow game down or choose a slower game.

I lost on time last night at move 52 in a one-minute game because I'm still getting accustomed to the touch-pad on my new notebook and I was tired. With a mouse, 60 moves in a minute is usually possible.

Longer than three minutes and it is too easy to cheat.