They are chess and to each his own--but they really don't help much to improve your chess ability.
Blitz and Bullet are not chess
Sort:
Sep 4, 2020
0
#285
backwardinduction wrote:
Unless you have a really high rating and fast mind, blitz and bullet are not chess at all. I have watch several fast games here on chess.com and find that blitz and bullet are way more popular than standard game. In most blitz and bullet games, even high rating players make stupid moves so frequently, the only thing matters is time. Although some players are so good that they can make checkmate in 5 seconds, most players can not do that at all. So far as I see, chess is a game that need careful thinking and careful thinking takes time. Moving pieces just to see who can move faster is kind of childish, this make chess ugly. I suggest chess.com forbid those players whose rating lower than 2200 playing blitz or bullet. (Try me, boy!)
SmyslovFan wrote:
Forbes_MacGregor wrote:
Things I hate about bullet chess, from the perspective of a middling player:
1. Players are rewarded for thoughtlessness---shallow and superficial moves give you a huge time edge. If you think deeply, you often end up burning so much of your clock that even though you are in a winning line, you'll run out of time to bring it to bring it to fruition.
2. Defensive play is excessively rewarded---Piling all your pieces on defense creates a situation where the attacking player has to consider a million possibilities as to how to break your defense, while you only have to think about nullifying his moves. It usually takes much less time to react to your opponent's moves than to come up with any creative ideas of your own. So this is basically a variation of #1---players who don't try to come up with a plan are rewarded.
3. 99% of people on this website will never resign. I find it unbelievably insulting that people will resort to pawn shuffling or cheap "surprise" moves in order to win on time or induce a blunder, when the game was lost long ago.
Long story short, I don't consider bullet chess to be real chess at anything short of an elite level. Because at a low-to-middle level, the clock is not a feature of the game. It IS the game. Countless players make no effort to disguise that their goal from move 1 is to win on time. Their entire approach is designed to burn time rather than improve their position.
I’ve looked at your own bullet games. At your level (1400), the vast majority of the games are won or lost on the board, not on time.
I don't know what the statistics are, but I can't imagine any data that tells the whole story. Utterly hopeless positions can (and frequently do) turn into a win in no time at all, if the winning player makes a time-induced blunder. It doesn't mean that the clock wasn't the focus of the game, or that the winning player wasn't outplayed before crunch time.
Sep 9, 2020
0
#287
The shorter time control calls for different strategies. Sometimes it's better to make a nothing move-it doesn't do anything, but doesn't make things worse. Often times it's better than winning a piece even, because the opponent might get some counterplay with the piece and time you out.
This is a bunch of BS can’t win I move fast has I can but still lose!!!! BS BS!!!!
I can have two queens but still lose on time. BS
You know my time is 1min my opponent say 20sec...Dam but I still lost I move fast as I can...WOW WHAT A STUPID GAME!!!
Sep 10, 2020
0
#292
marknauta wrote:
I can have two queens but still lose on time. BS
git gud
Sep 10, 2020
0
#293
krazeechess wrote:
bullet isnt chess but blitz is
under 1800 yes bullet isn't chess. Above that people actually play openings and stuff.
Sep 10, 2020
0
#294
SNUDOO wrote:
krazeechess wrote:
bullet isnt chess but blitz is
under 1800 yes bullet isn't chess. Above that people actually play openings and stuff.
If this snobbish opinion is true, at what level is chess at slower time controls “chess”?
Sep 10, 2020
0
#295
SmyslovFan wrote:
SNUDOO wrote:
krazeechess wrote:
bullet isnt chess but blitz is
under 1800 yes bullet isn't chess. Above that people actually play openings and stuff.
If this snobbish opinion is true, at what level is chess at slower time controls “chess”?
well it depends on the definition of "chess". Personally I think as long as it's chess rules and pieces it's chess, but krazee's definition there was "playing good moves".
I agree with the OP. They're more like variants of chess.
Bobby Fischer once said about blitz chess "It isn't chess really."
Sep 11, 2020
0
#298
I knew an IM who routinely played all of his games against people he didn’t respect in under 5 minutes. He’d wander around waiting for his turn then instantly reply. He usually won such games in under 25 moves.
He played far better at blitz time controls than most players rated U2000 could play at 40 moves in 2 hours.
I agree. For me real chess includes analyzing the position and calculating variations, and in order to do these things you need to have time to think.
Forbes_MacGregor wrote:
Things I hate about bullet chess, from the perspective of a middling player:
1. Players are rewarded for thoughtlessness---shallow and superficial moves give you a huge time edge. If you think deeply, you often end up burning so much of your clock that even though you are in a winning line, you'll run out of time to bring it to bring it to fruition.
2. Defensive play is excessively rewarded---Piling all your pieces on defense creates a situation where the attacking player has to consider a million possibilities as to how to break your defense, while you only have to think about nullifying his moves. It usually takes much less time to react to your opponent's moves than to come up with any creative ideas of your own. So this is basically a variation of #1---players who don't try to come up with a plan are rewarded.
3. 99% of people on this website will never resign. I find it unbelievably insulting that people will resort to pawn shuffling or cheap "surprise" moves in order to win on time or induce a blunder, when the game was lost long ago.
Long story short, I don't consider bullet chess to be real chess at anything short of an elite level. Because at a low-to-middle level, the clock is not a feature of the game. It IS the game. Countless players make no effort to disguise that their goal from move 1 is to win on time. Their entire approach is designed to burn time rather than improve their position.
I have been taught that its wise to make fast moves that don't blunder to win on time in bullet games.
Things I hate about bullet chess, from the perspective of a middling player:
1. Players are rewarded for thoughtlessness---shallow and superficial moves give you a huge time edge. If you think deeply, you often end up burning so much of your clock that even though you are in a winning line, you'll run out of time to bring it to bring it to fruition.
2. Defensive play is excessively rewarded---Piling all your pieces on defense creates a situation where the attacking player has to consider a million possibilities as to how to break your defense, while you only have to think about nullifying his moves. It usually takes much less time to react to your opponent's moves than to come up with any creative ideas of your own. So this is basically a variation of #1---players who don't try to come up with a plan are rewarded.
3. 99% of people on this website will never resign. I find it unbelievably insulting that people will resort to pawn shuffling or cheap "surprise" moves in order to win on time or induce a blunder, when the game was lost long ago.
Long story short, I don't consider bullet chess to be real chess at anything short of an elite level. Because at a low-to-middle level, the clock is not a feature of the game. It IS the game. Countless players make no effort to disguise that their goal from move 1 is to win on time. Their entire approach is designed to burn time rather than improve their position.
bullet and blitz are definitely chess. All three of those are valid strategies and tricks people use to win on time. In his video lessons "How to be lucky in Chess" GM Daniel Naroditsky says he entered a dead drawn opposite colored bishop endgame solely for the purpose of easy flagging.
Winning on the clock is just as important as winning on the board, because they both produce the same result: a win.
Point #2: Defensive play is actually harder than attacking. The attacker simply has to create multiple threats (at the most basic level) and the defender has to burn more time than the attacker to mitigate those threats. And perhaps in the process of doing so, loosens up his position and gets mated anyways!
A common strategy in time pressure is to make moves that aren't "great" but don't destroy your position either.