What do you think is better? Classical, rapid, or blitz?

Classical is untimed

Classical does have time limits--usually an hour or two for the game, with a delay or bonus of a few seconds per move so players about to run out of time can still make hurried moves.

aah ok

Best for what?

I like 10 min matches the most. Not too fast I have to rush, not too slow that my opponent can afk and make me bored out of my mind and resign.

Classical, obviously. And when I say "classical" I mean very long time controls, like the standard ones, where the player can express his playing strength to its maximum potential, where mistakes are due to errors in evaluation and not to the need to hurry and move, and where moves and analyzes can be brought to their maximum possible level of depth; ultimately, where chess is expressed at the highest level.

I only experienced it on one occasion, in the only tournament I participated, long time ago: an insignificant club tournament, but a great experience ( time control: 2 hours for the first 40 moves, 1 hour to finish : after every game my legs became stiff as pieces of wood ).

Rapid games (not to mention blitz ones) mostly seem to me to be a race against time, and therefore often not very satisfying. Unfortunately, I have to settle for playing blitz, and I'm lucky when I find time for a rapid game. Better than nothing, anyway.

Isn’t classical just daily games?

I would say there's a difference, in classical I'd probably remember my plans better than daily (also called correspondence chess)

"Classical. 30|0 rapid is basically classical"

Of course it is but this dumb site makes no distinction. Even 60/0 falls into the "rapid" category.