Let's play really really fast :)

I know many masters and grandmasters and really awesome people have something fundamentally against bullet games. But here's a game that I though showed some nice intuition from both sides and not many mistakes until the end (and most importantly no dropped pieces )

1/0 time controls

21...bxc4 "Essentially forced"

doesn't Bxb2 win some material?  In 1/0 I probably would have thrown out ...c6 though.  Anyway why do you say capturing is forced?

I like how you refused to give up the d file, good move for fast game when b2 has been hanging for awhile.

If you wanna se bullet skills, then check out some Nakamura and ChessNetwork games.

"A pawn sac for tempo"?  I sac my Queen for tempo!

Well said, sir 

oops. Didn't notice that 

You know, I do appreciate people who can play bullet/blitz chess really well, but not as much as people who can play standard really well (grandmasters )

But anyway, solid game considering the time control. Obviously the play is nothing fancy, but it means a lot to be able to carry out a reasonable strategy and tactically very solid. My play would just collapse in 1 minute, though I think with practice I could get decent (still, I will always be best at long, because long favors understanding and visualization/deep calculation), as I noticed by practising a bit I've been able to play blitz better, so I could probably do the same to adjust to an even lower time control. Could, but will never

Well no; with less time your plans will most likely be less involved. It's almost entirely based on instinctively finding good moves, which of course is a good skill! Of course there are little things like premoving and stuff, and it actually reminds me of the sort of tactics one would use in a card game or something for some reason.

"They have something "fundamentally against" them because they suck at them."

While I don't disagree with you using "against and "suck" in the same sentence (because in way I do think they're connected), I think a deeper answer is more appropriate. Perhaps it's because they have something fundamentally against them and this in turn discourages them to get better (because adding in exclusive bullet tactics makes me afraid it gives me bad habits in my play in general), initially sucking, and so will remain sucking.

@what you just said  (lol).

I don't play long games in live because I don't have extended periods of time to play chess nor the patience. That's why CC is perfect for me 

"@what you just said  (lol)."

I don't get it. My second paragraph may sound like some insane theory but I actually think it's true (applies to me anyway). I have started to learn some more blitz- specific strategies, basically increasing my blitz rating by hundreds of points in a matter of weeks; if only my "real" chess could improve that quickly, oh well. But for bullet I simply don't want to put in that effort just to get good at it, which would distract me from improving my overall game. Because we're all capable of being good players of any time control if we have a good grasp on how to play good chess in general, but in fact just a few tweaks can make huge differences in strength when it comes to quicker chess. For me I have been trying to somehow play as if I'm playing a long game but make more rushed decisions; but I'm still planning and everything, even if it's all quicker.

I think that bullet is really a chess variant, not chess proper. Before some semi-beginner who is quick with the mouse starts lecturing me what it is all about, let me say that I have played thousands of bullet games but I don't take them at all seriously, I play them out of boredom. Blitz however is a version of chess and should be taken seriously.

Oh I wasn't smiling and laughing at the content of what you said, more so over the tone of it (namely the final paragraph from post #9)