"He who analyzes blitz is stupid"

What do you think of this famous Nezhmetdinov quote? Is it really stupid to analyse blitz games?

@1
Yes.
It makes no sense spending more time analysing a blitz game than playing the game.

I almost always play 5+0. Sometimes i analyze the game after especially when i thought i had a winning position that i couldn't convert to a win or didn't have the time to find the best continuation. I think it's worth to do that especially if you don't really play much slow chess in general.

I think it's worth it only if the game was really good or you think you missed something.

Analyzing faster games can reveal certain insights in your thought process and certain weaknesses that repeat themselves in patterns. Not as useful as analyzing longer games but not useless.

I completely disagree with it. Analyzing leads to greater understanding. It doesn't matter what timer the positions arose from - most games have something you can learn from.

Compare these two players, for example:

Player A plays blitz, and never analyzes his games.

Player B plays blitz, and analyzes all of his games.

Which player do you think will learn more?

not even a GM tbh

You will get the most out of analyzing a rapid game, but analyzing a blitz game can be beneficial as well.

I would guess the quote wasn't made to be taken so literally. Ofc if you play blitz its useful to analyse the games and see what you do right or wrong to improve. Maybe they wanted to say that if you want to improve and analyse chess, blitz isn't the optimal format to do this.

Depends. I have analysed from bullet games - not the game entire game, but just some interesting positions to know what the engine would do differently.

In a word - disagree.

People who say blitz games are usless in my experience tend to be players who either predominately play slow chess, are better at slow chess than they are at speed chess, or really mean that analysing blitz chess is useless for improving your classical chess.

If you want to get better at blitz chess, of course it makes sense to analyse your blitz games.
I wouldnt analyse too deeply, especially moves that were made under time pressure, but you can still learn a lot from general tactical ideas that may have been missed that the engine picks up - or if there was a critical moment in the game and the wrong move was played - understanding why.

I also run my openings through a database, to see which of my openings score poorly. Even though I almost exclusively play blitz, this kind of review helps me identify lines where I fail routinely so I can address those more deliberately. I tend to pick gambit side-lines in blitz that are less known but create complications for the opponent if they are not prepared.
Usually they are not well prepared as no one in a classical game tends to play dubious gambits, meaning your openings can have a lot of surprise value in blitz.
Now - is this approach going to make me a better chess player? At classical, definitely not. At blitz? Well - it has!

That's true and i agree with most of your points but chesscom only offers 5+5 instead of 5+2 and 5+5 seems too slow for my taste.

Well the quote is rather outdated from a time that blitz was a fun mode of chess entirely. Nowadays Blitz seems to be the meta and probably the future of chess as younger generations are preferring it over slower time controls.

That's why I only analyse bullet

 I disagree completely. Blitz and faster time controls are a bad quality chess blunder fiesta. The only reason fast time controls are the latest fad is because Nakamura sells them on Twitch as the future of chess. 

 Naka is being disingenuous, but obviously he can't sell classical time format to the impatient Twitch audience. Same goes for all the other more or less famous recent Twitch streamers. If they tried to sell Classical, their audience would go away and their $$$$ opportunity would evaporate. 

i thought this was fischers quote

I think you are wrong. New generations tend prefer speed chess over slow chess in general no matter if they are Hikaru fans or not. The world is moving faster nowadays, in every aspect. OTB chess becomes less and less popular. We as kids learned how to play on chessboards, kids nowadays learn to play chess on the computer. Blitz is indeed the future of chess, as slower time controls are slowly dying out along with their aging fanbase. I'm not saying that slow chess will be completed abandoned, but I'm saying that it will get less and less popular as years go by.

actually i was confusing it with "Blitz Chess Kills your Idea" quote from fischer as thats what i got after researching a bit looking into some older forums and stuff. i think he said that he believed playing fast wasn't good for improving and that the format you can be drunk and still win

Thanks to theoretical knowledge and engine analysis, today's players can play blitz at relatively high levels.

Not as accurate as classical, of course. The short timer still induces mistakes. But I'm quite certain that modern blitz is considerably more streamlined and accurate than the blitz from Nezhmetdinov's days.

Especially in the hands of Super GMs.

 Ok, a couple of things to mention here: 

- Slow time controls will always be king, because that's where the best quality chess is played. Those are where chess has been improved on for decades, and that's where it will continue to be. No one is going to spend hours every day studying variations, hiring teams to help them find quality novelties to play, etc, only to throw everything away at a blunder in a bullet match. 

- What aging fanbase? No one really cares about the fanbase, chess fanbase has always been quite small anyways. This is not the NBA or WWE which needs a huge fanbase to be able to subsist.

 And the biggest newer "fanbase" is Twitch, which is composed of very low rated amateurs. Let me give you some news. The world of competitive chess is a toxic bubble which does not even acknowledge low rated people. Even people at 2000 are ignored because they are "low".

 And why would they acknowledge 1500-rated amateurs? With talents getting GM titles by the age of 13, I guarantee if we both went to play a tournament for kids under the age of 10, we would NOT win it, not even close - we would be destroyed by under 9yo's who already play at Master strength. Why would they even listen to us when 9yo olders who study the game and take it up seriously, play better chess than us?

 If look at the top fide ratings you will already see quite a bit of "younger" people there

https://ratings.fide.com

 and if you went browsing lower ranks you would see even more players from the younger crowd rated at Classical. 

 Not to mention to get official FIDE titles you have to play Classical, and no one is going to ruin a promising talent's career telling them to only focus on blitz and bullet, and disregard classical chess. Slow time controls will always be the most important part in the development of a player, where the best quality chess is played at, and where it will be further developed.