Is 10+0 players pool stronger than the 15+10 pool or the 30+0 pool?

I agree, according to math 30+0 is more than 15+10 if the game lasts less than 90 moves, but in practice I have seen people lose 30+0 on time and I myself have checkmated with 1 second left on the clock when I played 30+0 while I have never seen such things happen in 15+10.

Yes because that is the default time controls. People are lazy to change the custom time control.

It's the other way around.
99% of the people playing Rapid are playing 10+0 and any one I have ever known playing 15+10 were doing it to inflate their rating because they felt 10+0 was too difficult.
Besides that, statistically, you have the stronger players in 10+0 just by virtue of that pool being SO much bigger and this is similar to how we would expect to see better athletes in a very large school vs. a small country school with a graduation class of 50 people.
Finally, there is the matter of glicko. Higher glicko leads to higher rating volatility and inaccuracy and formats that have longer TC's tend to have people playing fewer games and therefore not getting their glicko low. This is something you notice when you compare blitz vs. rapid as a whole. In blitz people get such a high volume of games in on average there tends to be less high glicko players which means less rating volatility which ultimately means you are less likely to run into overrated people.
There are SOME caveats to this, like people who are primarily blitz/fast TC players who are stronger in blitz than in rapid will do even worse in higher TC's. Personally, I tend to be stronger the higher the TC.
Anyways, in conclusion, I think the higher TC's are great, and more comparable to real tournament play, however, I wish cc had a dedicated format for those like Lichess does. If you are among the 1% playing 15+10 in a pool where 99% of people are doing 10+0 you're rating is most likely going to be inflated.

LOL it is not laziness at all. It's simply because I want my Elo to be statistically real. If I am trying to see where I stand in a player pool, I am not going to play a format that effectively causes me to avoid 98% of the people in that pool.

If FIDE and USCF categorizes 10/0 as blitz, what does that mean?

In this context of the point I was making, literally nothing is what it would mean.
I'm not saying that 10+0 is "harder" than 15+10 based on the differences in the format themselves, but more because they both exist in the same pool with WAY more people playing 10+0.
The way I see it, if most of the pool was playing 15+10 for rapid I would be too, but as far as I can tell, most people do that now to avoid the main player pool, face weaker opponents, and get an inflated rating.

By the way, Chuck369 I can't help but notice a trend on your account:
Rapid: Most people play 10+0 so you play 30+0
Blitz: Most people play 5+0 and 3+0 so you play 5+5
Bullet: Most people play 1+0 so you play 2+1
The obvious reason people do this is to game the system and get an artificially higher rating.
If you can play 5+5 there is no reason you can't play 10+0
If you can play 2+1 there is no reason you can't play 3+0 or 5+0.
Then of course you are on your bio bragging about being underrated.......

1.) No it isn't and hasn't been since 2019. This is good because it was a flagrant way for people to inflate their blitz ratings
2.) 30 years ago there was no online chess and 10+0 might be blitz OTB but you have to take time to physically move pieces and write down notation.
3.) I am and this is pure nonsense.
4.) Again, FIDE is primarily OTB...online can afford to be faster when you are not physically moving pieces or notating
5.) I'm judging Chuck not based on his rating, but on him playing in a way that creates an artificially inflated rating by avoiding the main player pools every chance he gets
6.) That's a matter of opinion. They both matter to me.
7.) I couldn't care less.
You started this off by saying you don't understand a thing I am saying and you have conclusively demonstrated that.....
I'm not saying 10+0 is harder than 15+10..... I am saying that if both these formats are lumped together but 10 times more people are playing 15+10 then there will be rating inflation and some people deliberately take advantage of this to look stronger and then go around posturing as if they are. I don't respect it.

I notice the same. At 10 I hover just below 2k but at 15+10 I can't break 1900.

I play 5/5 as an alternative to 10/0 because both are blitz under USCF and FIDE. I only play blitz to develop my feel and exercise my lines when I am coming off from a break, because of rust. Others times, I’m drunk and stone, and just want to move chess pieces for fun.

I’m not a rapid player either but 15/10 is FIDE’s standard therefore that’s the measuring stick for rapid play in terms of accurate skill set.

Each time control takes a different skill set compounded by different player pools gives us these artificial ratings; one of many reasons why online ratings are bogus.

Don’t even get me started on chess politics, ethics, scandals and cheating.

I am not inflating my rating, I hardly play seriously. You have seen my wins against stronger players 200-600 rating points above me in tournament format! That itself is amusing.

Anyways, 90/30 is the standard and given for titles because of specific reasons.

Your reasonings are just conspiracies and opinion, not facts. Others have already chimed in as well.

@chozo_scion are you a Kan Sicilian and Catalan player?

Actually I looked at some of your games and noticed that we do have similar repertoires haha. I don't play Kan, though, I play Taimanov which is VERY similar as I'm sure you know except I tend to have 5.Qc7 on the board and often delay a6. Also, one of your students reached out to me and apparently we are almost the same age too.
I do play Catalan as well and I LOVE that opening.

So here is the thing, my reasonings are not some arbitrary opinions but rather mathematical arguments grounded in empiricism and statistics as my background has long since been math-related.

"Online Ratings are Bogus"

This is a common comment I've heard from people who found much more success OTB than online for whatever reason. You'd be surprised to find, though, that the online Elo system can have a remarkable level of accuracy and repeatability and even correlation to USCF and FIDE. I've seen this personally, in practice, and also there is this great website here that tracks it:

https://chessratingscomparison.com/

That being said, though, like any statistical system, it has limitations. Like any mathematic function, it can be seen as being analogous to a machine with output only as good as the input.. I have a lengthy blog about this system on my page but in short, Glicko RD ( RD stands for rating deviation) is essentially your confidence interval and high glicko equates to high rating volatility and inaccuracy. With high glicko, your chances of running into overrated, and therefore weaker, players is much more likely.

So when it comes down to it, online ratings are mostly NOT bogus....but they can be depending on the input you give the machine. The next part here which I have countless times witnessed is people MAKING their online rating bogus INTENTIONALLY. Unfortunately it is all too common for us to link our rating to our sense of self-worth and self-esteem and also we can't help enjoying the social status of it.... so some people have intentionally gamed the system and inflated their rating.

Personally, I ultimately find that to be pointless, unhealthy, and not constructive for chess improvement. When it comes to any journey, the most important first step is to know accurately where you are starting. I've seen many players delude themselves into thinking they are much stronger by gaming the Elo system only to become crushingly discouraged later on down the road when confronted with reality. I will always prefer a lower rating that I know is accurate over a higher one that I know is inflated.

To that end, I follow these keys to make it accurate as possible:
1.) I keep glicko relatively low. This is done by playing a certain volume of games ( glicko decreases with more games played). I stay relatively active as well ( glicko increases during periods of inactivity).
2.) In any given Elo player pool, I aim for the formats that reflect the pool as a whole as best as I can. The fact is, I tend to be stronger the longer the TC is and I'm convinced I'd have a higher rating if I played 15+10 but Elo is not useful to me if it is not accurate.

For example, here I am beating a 2200 with the black pieces in 15+10 and it wasn't a random online game, but the semi-finals for an online competition I finished third place in.
https://www.chess.com/game/live/81122447767

What happens to be standard in USCF and FIDE is irrelevant for all those reasons above and more. This is online chess, not FIDE. For example, in OTB we need a little extra time to physically move pieces and write down notation which forms some of the basis for delays, increments, and additional time.

Anyways I do all this because I want Elo to be useful to me and the less accurate it is, the less useful it is. Primarily it serves two functions A.) It helps you reliably find opponents of similar ability and B.) Helps serve as a basis to gauge your levels of improvement.

So with all that being said, I stand by my statement that the 10+0 player pool is stronger, not because 10+0 is inherently harder, but more because people playing 30+0 are on average going to have much higher glicko, and secondly because the number of people doing 30+0 is much smaller. Finally, I know personally many people who deliberately play 30+0 "to get a higher rating" and while you may not be one of them, you benefit from them being in the pool.
Now like you said, there is this caveat of some people who have speed chess-related skillsets. These guys will be strongest in bullet and become weaker the higher the time goes. However, many people also are good at speed chess simply because they are strong at chess as a whole including OTB and I know MANY folks like this as well. That's why many people here anecdotally say "my rating dropped when I played 15+10." However, many people are the opposite.

10+0 to me is the perfect online format and I don't consider it "speed chess" although any TC below that is IMO. My Taimanov repertoire by itself has over 1400 variations and I need to get a fairly high volume of games in to continue to practice and learn all this. 10+0 is just long enough to be a meaningful game that is not ended by time pressure, but short enough where I can play many. 15+10 is more something I do for online competitions.

This is anecdotal and I know people that are the exact opposite. This might mean something else like maybe you are better at faster TC's or maybe need to work on endgames etc

Thats awesome to hear!

I hope you can help that person out.

My time is limited nowadays now that I fell in love with a special someone.

Congrats! Happy for you, man.
Ever since my breakup I've had so much more time for chess but I'll be looking again soon haha

Thank-you!

I’ll be honest, my board vision sucks and patience is stunted for chess at the moment but if it weren’t for two+ dozen training partners, I wouldn’t be engage in online chess.

♟️call them training partners or friends now because they have surpassed me or moved onto 2000+

I bring value to others ways such as applying proven training methods and techniques at the club level, life management and skills.

Chess knowledge is old and readily available anyways….

That's pretty cool! 
For me online chess was how I started back in 2017 and things really escalated once I joined an online community which helped put me in touch with all kinds of ideas and resources. I've meant to compete OTB since last year but I had a lot of goals I wanted to reach first establishing my new opening repertoire and getting certain rating milestones. The goal for 2023 was to get 1900 and I DID get 1895....twice...haha but I play a very large volume of games to help me continually go back into my repertoire courses and pinpoint which variations to work on and because of that I tilt too. One day I did 86 10+0 games in a single day. It's a little much but I think that has helped me have stamina for long OTB events too.
I did play my first two events in the past two months and I have my third on Sunday. I'm finding OTB to be extremely fun. Where you say board vision is an issue, for me, it was acclimating to board vision in person OTB as opposed to that isometric view you get online and so far it's come along nicely. Looking forward to compete some more!

Go for your goals! You’ll regret it if you don’t.

I will say chess is becoming or if not already, a young man’s (and woman’s) game.

I mean, I am 41 so I hope it's not a young man's game only LOL. 
Thanks, though. My main goal is to have fun and chess is inherently just that. I want to improve my strength and perhaps rating will follow and mostly I want to be the co-author of cool games. That's what I'm all about in this game