"Blitz and Bullet are not chess."

It's not simple english that's the problem, it's just broken english.

Using the clock in blitz/bullet is different from blowing up a bunch of pieces in a one-square radius in atomic chess. If we use video game terms, blitz and bullet are still vanilla chess while variants are modded chess. 

You just help my point - blitz emphasizes a different skill set in chess than classical.

It does and there nothing wrong is accepting what is right there is no point in shamelessly defending points that you don't even trust in. The question is it worth it ok you are getting a skill but at what cost it may affect your classical chess and the blitz skill can be only used in a very certain situations.

English is not even the most spoken bruh, I don't have to be grammar expert to type is here accordingly many are not.

Look. This was never about whether or not blitz and bullet helps your classical. You're mistaken when you think that I'm saying blitz and bullet help your classical. In fact I have never said a single word about the relationship between the two except that both are chess. I didn't say that one skill was better than the other. 

You just help my point - blitz emphasizes a different skill set in chess than classical.

Can you elaborate this?

Blitz, bullet, rapid & classical/standard are all “chess”, only defined by time controls.  The first time piece was a sand glass (1861) and first time clock (1883); time controls were introduced to curtail lengthy games.  With the rise in popularity of chess influenced by Fischer, “Speed” chess (5-10 min) began as a diversion/break from classical play in clubs as well as a tool to try out new openings/practice. With the internet and advanced programs/platforms like chess.com, short time control chess has gained tremendous popularity as people are willing to play more often with short time controls.  BTW, online play does not compare to OTB, classical or speed.

Personally, Bullet & Blitz are not serious chess but good for a bit of fun.  Playing them frequently contributes to bad habits.  The logic of short time controls contributes to quick decision making does not stand the test.  Longer time controls contribute to better decision making.  Rapid (<10) is great for practice and feedback.  Rapid (G/30, G/60) or Daily provide a better insight to a player’s chess knowledge and abilities.  I think players who focus only on “quick” games shortchange their game.   

You're not wrong - but I never made any connections between blitz and bullet being beneficial to your chess skill in classical.

you said in post #41 that you might use cheap flagging skills to your advantage.

This is what i mean when I say that blitz and bullet emphasizes a different skillset - one more focused on reaction time and quick thinking.

This is what i mean when I say that blitz and bullet emphasizes a different skillset - one more focused on reaction time and quick thinking.

I was referring my post to this particular point the above point is a skill

The question is it worth it ok you are getting a skill but at what cost it may affect your classical chess and the blitz skill can be only used in a very certain situations.

That's not a question relevant to my original post.

I posted that both classical chess and blitz chess are chess. I said nothing about how they affect each other.

this has nothing to do with you OG post but the post #42

Wut l thought they're checkers

Blitz only creates bad habits if it's the only form of chess one plays.

But if you also study properly, and play in longer time controls, then it's unlikely that blitz will harm your progress.

I'd even argue that blitz can help one's classical chess, in some ways. Getting past the fear of making mistakes, for example, which can be crippling to some players in OTB situations. Along with the problem of overthinking.

Anyone who has played long time controls OTB should know the paralysis of being faced with a position where you aren't sure what to do. Should I open that diagonal? Should I double those pawns? Will trading a knight for a bishop haunt me later in the game?

The clock ticks on, with no answer in sight. 5 minutes. 10 minutes. 20 minutes later, and instead of finding an answer, now you're simply even more confused ... Your opponent seems to have an endless amount of resources ... Everywhere you look, you're seeing ghosts.

Playing blitz has one nice benefit here: of forcing a player to push past these kinds of paralysis moments - to make a choice and find a plan, ASAP. Sink or swim. Create something, from the position in front of you.

In that regard, I'd say that blitz actually offers some benefits toward one's classical play. It can help teach you to be proactive and decisive.

#42 compared chess to chess variants. 

I am also a speed chess player and very much like it but when you go deep you either leave or get addicted both may improve your chess but speed chess is slower buts it's the fun way.

Other hand I think blitz is very much different from bullet there is some consistency in the position to think and time 

i knows it not related to OG but this deep down in the discussion I thought it would be good to say it out

Blitz is chess

bullet illustrates spamming the pieces. Hyperbullet,(15sec|0inc) illustrates premoving and checking as much as possible to distract the opponent.

Blitz illustrates sort of fast moves.

Well explained dude

I thin *brand new* players say bullet games are not chess because they are literally using all the time to find any legal move. I was there not long ago. On the opposite extreme, GMs are playing bullet games with more theory and tactics than intermediate players can muster in six hours.