Blitz and Bullet are not chess
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Blitz and bullet can be viewed as variants of the standard game. They test your brains to compute the moves like a machine. But they deny a certain quality of a true chess player, i.e., patience. Stamina is another test: you have to be physically fit and mentally sound while maintaining your composure as you beat the hell out of your opponent, or as you extricate yourself from a trap or dead end. Blitz and bullet may provide a quick shot of adrenaline rush. Chess, as they say, is a form of war minus the viciousness of plunder and killing and destruction, but it also teaches us the value of humanity—in a sportsman-like fashion.
Whatever you choose doesn't matter. Blitz or bullet or standard is just a game. But the problem is, we take seriously every defeat instead of enjoying the art of thinking out of the box set by the great grandmasters.
chess is chess. same game. different time control.
2 HOURS PER PLAY? I cannot accept that... With so much time to reason out each move, anyone can be good. 1 hr for the entire match is more than enough to test just what a players got.
Same ol BS. Saying certain speeds of chess "are not chess". There is no speed limit for a "standard game" In my day it was often two hours for the first 40 moves. Now I think it is faster?
One hour is not enough time IMO. That's only 30 minutes per player. If I take my time I can visualize several moves ahead but if I only have 30 minutes I can't spend 10-15 minutes calculating a line because if that line doesn't work out in my head then I just wasted half my clock. If I could find opponents here for a good 45/45 or 90/30 I would never play 30/0 again.
marzinho wrote:
2 HOURS PER PLAY? I cannot accept that... With so much time to reason out each move, anyone can be good. 1 hr for the entire match is more than enough to test just what a players got.
I see some "masters" who don't accept free queens, just because they want the time.
The problem with daily chess or even a 30-minute game is that you never know what computer program your opponent may be using, and if she/he is, then you're just wasting your time (as you're not playing a fair game for points, but are rather just there so that the person using the program can rob you of your points).
I don't play chess seriously, I don't have the time to commit to practicing and studying it, and I don't have time for 30 minute games either. So you're telling me I shouldn't be able to play blitz games just because you wouldn't and just because I'm not above 2200, that it to say in like the highest percentile of the site's users? Wow.
I think blitz is still chess because I can play my first 10 moves in 4 seconds, and spend more time later. But bullet isn't really chess; you just have to make random moves that aren't losing and make sure you have enough time.
AwesomeJW wrote:
I think blitz is still chess because I can play my first 10 moves in 4 seconds, and spend more time later. But bullet isn't really chess; you just have to make random moves that aren't losing and make sure you have enough time.
excuse me, all of you? bullet is very much chess. 1 0 is just a different time control, all still the same game. if u want something that is not chess, check out lichess's ultrabullet.
marzinho wrote:
2 HOURS PER PLAY? I cannot accept that... With so much time to reason out each move, anyone can be good.
Then it's good player against good player - and a better game.
At the variants forum I often play 1 day per move (like this game).
cyborg86 wrote:
AwesomeJW wrote:
I think blitz is still chess because I can play my first 10 moves in 4 seconds, and spend more time later. But bullet isn't really chess; you just have to make random moves that aren't losing and make sure you have enough time.
excuse me, all of you? bullet is very much chess. 1 0 is just a different time control, all still the same game. if u want something that is not chess, check out lichess's ultrabullet.
Excuse you! Ultrabullet is very much chess. It's just a different time control, all still the same game.
if u want something that is not chess, check out ultra-super-mega-bullet-bonanza.
AwesomeJW wrote:
I see some "masters" who don't accept free queens, just because they want the time.
Depends how far the capturing piece has to move.
cyborg86 wrote:
AwesomeJW wrote:
I think blitz is still chess because I can play my first 10 moves in 4 seconds, and spend more time later. But bullet isn't really chess; you just have to make random moves that aren't losing and make sure you have enough time.
excuse me, all of you? bullet is very much chess. 1 0 is just a different time control, all still the same game. if u want something that is not chess, check out lichess's ultrabullet.
Take it from one of the best bullet player in the world. Nakamura does not consider bullet as chess. In his bullet book, in one of the game Nakamura criticize his opponent winning the queen because he lost much precious time.
sammy_boi wrote:
cyborg86 wrote:
AwesomeJW wrote:
I think blitz is still chess because I can play my first 10 moves in 4 seconds, and spend more time later. But bullet isn't really chess; you just have to make random moves that aren't losing and make sure you have enough time.
excuse me, all of you? bullet is very much chess. 1 0 is just a different time control, all still the same game. if u want something that is not chess, check out lichess's ultrabullet.
Excuse you! Ultrabullet is very much chess. It's just a different time control, all still the same game.
if u want something that is not chess, check out ultra-super-mega-bullet-bonanza.
true, i still agree that ultrabullet is chess as well... currently rated 2282 lol
The game is still chess. It's just that how you think and decide on moves is very different from slow games.
And this is coming from someone who used to hate bullet and blitz, and still prefers classical time controls to speed.
It's maybe half way between a real game and a variant. The evals are different. For example initiative is better than normal and technical positions are more difficult than normal.
So is the 100m not running? Or Twenty20 not cricket? Or rugby 7s not rugby?
jengaias wrote:
Bullet and blitz are not chess(at least not the classical form of chess).
They wouldn't have different rating if they were chess.
So FIDE considers them a variant just like 3 check , 960 and many others.
Chess main ingredient is thinking.If you take thinking out or if you attempt to greatly reduce it then you have something that has the same rules and mechanics but is very different.
For the same reason footsal is played like soccer but everybody agrees that is not soccer and ping pong (also known as table tennis)is played like tennis but everybody agrees that is not tennis.
Among top players you will find a lot that doubt the value of blitz even as a learning tool.Many trainers try to prevent their students from playing blitz and consider the time spend on it a total waste of time(Botvinnik was among them and players like Fischer , Short and Kramnik have said that it "destroys your brain cells" and "kills your ideas").
Nevertheless it's great fun and people want desperately to convince themselves that it's not a waste of time.They will say things like "I improved playing blitz" or "I learned a lot".
All these are true , one can learn "a lot" from blitz if compared with doing nothing.If compared though with playing long time control games and analysing them thoroughly afterwards , blitz fails desperately.1 long time control game against a good opponent can teach you more than a 1.000 blitz games.Serious players improve with tough tournaments and study , not with blitz.
Of course since none of us(or very very few) is a serious player , we can afford the luxury of some waste of time.
wrong