Blitz and Bullet are not chess

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.


Okay, I completely disagree. Bullet is just speed chess, but games like 5 min blitz are way more fun to play, and can also help you find tactics, checkmates, etc. faster. Some people don't have the time (or patience, in my case) to play longer time settings. For me, if I want a legitimate game, I play correspondence (mostly on a different chess site though).


If the scariest opponents are the ones who premove everything and don't even seem to care what moves they make, it shouldn't be considered legit. And that is how it feels to me when I"m playing 1|0.

When someone premoves everything, you are almost forced to premove to keep pace with them. In a normal game, you can use your opponent's time to think of your next move. But for constant premovers, it just doesn't work.


Oh it gets so boring.

You pin the f3N'.... h3 and then surprise ,surprise g5 +Qside castle.

This patzer stuff makes me cringe.



There is validity to the original post concerning this topic, But the trend for the future is bullet and blitz are going to replace slow chess for alot of people.


Op said:

"Unless you have a really high rating and fast mind, blitz and bullet are not chess at all."


The "at all" is an exaggeration.


And you explain to us, why this game is no chess:


It's a Blitz game 5mn KO


Was looking through the latest Informant. There are quite a few online blitz games in there. If they are publishable in Informant, there is no doubt they are chess. I don’t care what Fisher says. Actually, I’ve never cared about Fischer’s opinions (except his concrete analysis of chess positions—there Fischer is useful).


i'm not high rated in rapid or blitz - probably around 900, and bullet and blitz both help me learn openings. if you want to say its not chess, and more of a learning tool that might be up for debate. but! to say that these games are just random moves or favors pre-movers or defensive players is just wrong. skill isn't always about rating, even at lower ratings. (you could be 200 rated but actually a decent 800 player just experimenting with different openings in rated games) eventually once you get good enough you will outpace them and call them out on their BS and win by hanging pieces, checkmates, and eventually by time. you just have to get really good. if you're losing to people who play random moves, then you're just not good IMO.... if someone wins on time because theyre just moving their king around for 15 seconds while you're thinking about how to checkmate them then maybe you're bad and should get faster at checkmating people lol


I’ve been told that several times.  Especially as you are starting out and want to get better.


Blitz is most certainly chess. Bullet is most certainly chess.


hyperbullet is like a variant ngl

littlejimmywimmy wrote:

you haven't gotten any better though xd


I haven't been practicing with intent to get better. just puzzles recently


i like blitz but not bullet. nakamura even has a bullet chess book in which in one of the game he suggest a queen sacrifice not for mate or compensation but win on time. i consider bullet a chess variant.


I agree with you 100% in bullet. Most people that are not very good, including me, usually just try to simplify as much as possible to save time. I'd say 70 percent of my bullet game wins are from flagging, probably even more than that. I think blitz is a bit better, though, since I usually get enough time to think about each move. 


I understand what ur saying about bullet but tbh u can use blitz is probably the best if you want to actually improve

IAMDAGOAT123456789 wrote:

I understand what ur saying about bullet but tbh u can use blitz is probably the best if you want to actually improve

Blitz is better than bullet if you want to get better, but rapid and daily are best. The slower the time control are, the more time you get to think. You make better moves and then when you get used to it, you play faster. 


blitz and bullet are for fun for me.



Depends what you define "chess"

Different types of chess results in different skills and in the end you need to learn all of it

You can be amazing at rapid, but if you get into time trouble you'll need bullet and blitz skills to help

Now, bullet and blitz as it's own is fine

Bullet requires fast thinking + blundering less

Blitz isn't even that bad flagging wise, just play semi decent chess and don't take a minute per move

If you want to get better, you gotta master all time controls, so, yes, it is chess

If you define chess as whatever as long as it has the fundamental rules, it's chess


"semi chess"