If you master in opening and endgame then Bullet is easy for you.
I agree with the first part of this but not the second. By the time an endgame is reached, if an endgame is reached, there is little time left.
In a online tournament. Opening takes 4-5 seconds and capturing takes 15-20 seconds. And this is all about endgame. (If you analyse GM's game you may notice that they get 90+ accuracy in each game.)
I love bullet but I don't like blitz that much
i find speed chess very enjoyable. if in your mind that does not make me a real chess player, so be it. but do not tell me it should be "forbidden" ...
How is bullet and blitz not chess? Is it a statement on your lack of experience with playing either format? That one is more disposed to make mistakes during bullet play is the whole point. A great many people find bullet to be more suspenseful. That the moves are rushed doesn't make them less skilled, as the formulas for different lines and patterns have to be developed over time.
I've just noticed that this thread is over 10 years old. That's quite an accoplishment for an obvious trolling attempt (even is it spent most of the time in slumber).
I would like to add playing Bullet 1 min personally is so much fun, and over a length of playing it and building quite a high rating, my standard game has improved. I dont try to beat the opponent on time, I do try and play the best moves, and of course the more you play the faster you become, and the faster your decisions are, all stimulating the brain I think and making you a better player.
True
It's still "Chess." The structure and rules are exactly the same aside from the time. So, you know, still "Chess."
The best blitz and bullet players are the best classical chess players, not the best video gamers.
Some of the greatest blitz players of all time, including Capa, Petrosian, Fischer, Ulf Andersson and Carlsen, were also the best strategic chess players.
The best blitz and bullet players are the best classical chess players, not the best video gamers.
Some of the greatest blitz players of all time, including Capa, Petrosian, Fischer, Ulf Andersson and Carlsen, were also the best strategic chess players.
Hard to argue with that.
"SmyslovFan 2 days ago#581
The best blitz and bullet players are the best classical chess players, not the best video gamers.
Some of the greatest blitz players of all time, including Capa, Petrosian, Fischer, Ulf Andersson and Carlsen, were also the best strategic chess players."
Two top players who were not good at blitz are Alekhine and Portisch.
Some of the greatest blitz players of all time, including Capa, Petrosian, Fischer, Ulf Andersson and Carlsen, were also the best strategic chess players.
How can you forget Anand, in his younger days he was known as the "Lightning Kid".
"SmyslovFan 2 days ago#581
The best blitz and bullet players are the best classical chess players, not the best video gamers.
Some of the greatest blitz players of all time, including Capa, Petrosian, Fischer, Ulf Andersson and Carlsen, were also the best strategic chess players."
Two top players who were not good at blitz are Alekhine and Portisch.
There are stories of Alekhine going to the Marshall and Manhattan chess clubs, playing 1.a3 against all comers in blitz and winning every game. He tried to tell them it was the latest opening theory from Russia. (He was joking.)
Where did you learn that he wasn’t good at blitz? I have found simuls and a game against Euwe that shows he was excellent at blitz.
So far the only evidence I’ve found to support your claim is a discussion of him getting so drunk he lost some blitz games. But that was an anecdote about his drunkenness.
I don't agree, blitz is chess but bullet IS kind of random......
You are right there
Of course bullet and blitz are playable when a player know the openings a little bit and can handle the situation. Usually all players find a lot of pleasure playing bullet. Me too. But I have seen many commenting that bullet contains so many inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders. But it is not the case always. I am 1900+ so I am not too good. My idea of playing chess is so so. But it is expected that a player with such rating should memorize some fun opening lines, specially some gambits. Just now I finished a bullet match where you can find out that my opponent made huge blunders. On the contrary I played a neat one with 99.7% accuracy. But it is a rare case. Though he didn't respond to Scotch Gambit, he was punished. I recommend while playing bullet, a gambit is a strong weapon. See the output here. This opening also dangerous for longer time controlled games like 10 minutes Rapid. Players who are not so busy, should get some time to learn some gambit lines. If you apply a good opening and play a fair chess in any format, then obviously that is a chess.
Another game
Obviously these games are not bad. People can play bullet for fun and also to check how fast and right their thinking is.
blitz is for practice....and narhing more...
I understand that some people don’t like blitz. But when it is used as a tie break in major events such as the World Cup and World Championship, it’s worth learning how to play it.
The best players in the world play blitz regularly. Many of them got to be the best in the world by playing non-stop bullet and blitz online. Watch the top young players. They all play a ton of blitz.
Without time control?
Yes. Chess does not inherently include time controls; we just have them to 1) Challenge people and 2) prevent people from taking too long.