I only like attacking chess

I do wonder if more people view chess the way I do, I play chess for more than 40-years and I still love attacking chess very much. I like tactics in games and in puzzles. But if I am puzzling on chess.com I get this very stupid defensive puzzles, sure nice for people who like defense or positional play. My goal in chess is and will always be mating my opponent... I will sacrifice any piece to get there and if not I will lose. Sure I have teached chess and I do know a little about endgames but I have never liked dull chess. That is why I do not care for opening theory. I play my own openings and develop my own tactical plans. The question is are there more people like me, I mean people who like attacking but do not care for defensive play. If I make puzzles and get to 3200 every time I get impossible puzzles that ask for good defensive moves. No, I only want to think about attacking. That is fun, defense is like work, no thanks...

Ok

I’m not a fan of defense or passive chess in general but it has it place.

I played a 5/3 blitz game yesterday and my opponent was very passive despite being white and in a Sicilian game.

I lost on time in a winning position but no biggie. Some people play dull or defensive or passive but they have their place in chess as well.

I switched to this website from Lichess purely because I got sick of people playing d4 and doing their best impersonations of a brick wall.

Here there is more e5 and less overdefensive nonsense play, at least at my level (~1200 on both sites)

Apart from affinity, sometimes the situation calls for defense. Good chess is obviously a combination of both. But yes, it's nice to keep the initiative and build towards the attack at all times. But you have to keep in mind what the opponent is doing. Don't be absorbed in your own game but see the game as a whole - sort of depersonalized, transpersonalized, whatever.

I mean, the satisfaction of a checkmate has its defensive counterpart. When you outwit an attacking opponent by setting up a defensive formation that's impossible to puncture, your configuration trumps the opponent's who finds himself unable to mate in any variation. That kind of domination is often even more cruel to the opponent, because his psychology turns out based on a complete illusion and he can declare himself a moron.

A situation can seem to be defensive or Karpovian, but if your overall position is better, it will result in a more powerful attack. It's just two sides of the same system - defense = offense, just delayed. And those who can wait longer before biting into the juiciness turn out most intelligent, studies have shown!

Hence a great defense creates the same bloodthirsty feeling as slitting the throat of the opposing king. Sorry not sorry for the graphic analogies.

Defending chess can be far more exciting and can require more accuracy and more exact timing than attacking chess.

A Heroic Defense in the Sicilian Najdorf - Kids, don't try this at home! - Chess Forums - Chess.com

Everyone loves attacking chess, like me, but defending is also part of chess. Just learning attacking is not good enough. It's good to like attacking but to be a good player, you need to learn defending as well.

Thanks for the reactions, I got to 3200 puzzle rating again and got like ten defensive puzzles   duh   I do not want to think defensive so I move by intuition and am wrong  most of the time   but 3300 is still a goal    

Playing defense makes you attack better.
Playing attack makes you defend better.

Defensive chess mainly revolves around slow development and waiting for your opponent to screw up. Considering that most players make multiple mistakes and fast time controls affect accuracy, it works as an effective strategy.