Pawns are simple, right?

Some days I feel that I am a pathetic excuse for a chessplayer. Fortunately this feeling is temporary and goes away as soon as I beat someone with a high rating.

In a three minute live game yesterday, I easily reached a won position after each of us had used approximately 90 seconds:

I played 31...e6, which is not itself a drawing move even though the stronger 31...d5 is easy enough to find. Indeed, I played 32...d5 after my opponent played 32.g4. But, 32...d5 appears to be a mistake because it allows White to lock up the pawns with 33.e5. The games ended after another twenty or so rapid moves attempting to get the other player to make a foolish concession of a key penetration square. Neither player was willing to toss the game away in this manner and with a full minute-plus left on the clock was in no time pressure.

32...f6 leaves Black with a clear advantage.

After the game, I played a few games against my engine from the diagram position. I set the clocks at two minutes each: more than we had in the game, but enough to give me a chance if the computer reached a position when it could use tablebases. Engines are capable of moving in 0.01 seconds per move, or even faster. The human's clock will run down in a scramble.

I managed to lose a couple battles with the computer. Without going into the moves, suffice it to say that blowing a clear win in a blitz game against a human (and drawing) is a small blow to the ego compared to losing to a stupid box even if it does calculate 2.5 million positions per second. Geez, it's just kings and pawns: how can I go so wrong as to lose this elementary position?

2067?  I'd love to be that "pathetic"!

King and pawn endings are comparatively simple endgames, but they can be hard by their own merit.

How do human players play a move in 0.01 seconds? i just don't get it and i try my best but i usually make my fastest move in about 0.03 seconds on the clock.