I'm making fun of people who post that it's no skill, because these games aren't random moves. The person using less than 1 second per move almost always has a winning position as well.
Blitz is only moving fast, no skill
Sort:
I love how people complain about blitz or bullet, but they keep playing it.
Aug 17, 2017
0
#4
People are more likely angry that the skills they value are not as important. Lets face it: if you're slow it doesn't matter how good you are or what you know - you're screwed. Some people really don't like that aspect of the game. I reckon you also have folks like myself that only have time for blitz or only want to play blitz. So it's kinda frustrating I guess.
Aug 17, 2017
0
#5
stuzzicadenti wrote:
I'm sorry to say that there is certainly skill involved in blitz and bullet. If you think it's so easy why don't you play bullet against Nakamura and try to beat him on the clock, guaranteed he will checkmate you while you are busy just pushing pieces around randomly without using any logic, tactics, or strategy. In fact he will probably beat you even if you have 3 minutes and he has 1. People who trash talk bullet and blitz simply don't understand that great players can see things in a second that they won't even see after several minutes.
Not only was I the winner of all games posted, the list wasn't complied over a long session. I played all 10 in a row against random opponents (I wasn't beating the same guy over and over).
Also GMs give simuls to guys like me. 3 minutes vs 1 against Naka? No. Naka could give me 1000 minutes to 1. Time odds are irrelevant at that gap.
3|0 games where the winning side used less than 1 second per move on average. Looks easy right?