why do so many people like to play rapid when (in my opinion) it’s the worst time mode?

I personally find it ironic the slowest live time control is called rapid. I mostly play 10 minute games.

When I play over the board I like to play at least 60 min.

My favorite over-the-board time control is a solid 90+30

I (Sadly) don't have the patience for such things....

bro

Noticing your rating, it probably is enough time for YOU to play as well as you are going to.

All those classic games by Capablanca, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Tal, Fischer, Spassky, Karpov, Kasparov, etc that everyone studies were played with time controls like 2 1/2 hours for forty moves, then 30 minutes for each additional 10 moves. It takes time to create your best work.

Great point!

How much time do players have at a FIDE World Championship? I don't remember.

I think it has an appeal to players who blunder a lot ; or players who make excessive mistakes that they attribute to the time restraints. I like the ten min rapid. I feel like if there's a good move that I must find ; my chances are better in that time frame. However the same benefit goes to who you are playing. I mean so many wins come from the blunders and hurried mistakes of our opponents. I have seen that extra time come back and bite me ; because with that extra time ; my opponents make fewer mistakes ; and that translates into losing more games for me. So it's a double edged sword.

The most recent championship had a time control (for the first 14 classical games) of 2 hours for 40 moves, 1 hour for the next 20 moves, then 15 minutes to complete the game, with a 30 second increment starting at move 61. Successively shorter time controls were set for tie-breaking rounds, Ding won the 4-game rapid (game in 25 minutes with a 10-second increment) tiebreak playoff so the blitz tiebreakers (game in 5 minutes with 3-second increment) were not needed.

The most usual FIDE time control is 90'+30" for the first 40 moves, and then 30'+30" for the rest of the game.

I've lost a lot of skill as I've gotten older. 10 years ago, I was 2200. Now I struggle to maintain 2000 blitz. So I like to play the occasional rapid game. It's even worse for me now in OTB club games, where I find myself running low on time even with 15 mins a side. That said, the main problem with rapid online is the number of cheaters you encounter ramps up significantly. Whenever I play a string of rapid games, I almost always get notified by the site that someone cheated and I get rating point refund.

yeah rapid sucks, play classical instead

Matter of taste.

Actually, I don't like rapid play, because it is too rapid !!... If I had the time, I would play games with at least 60+30 control. What I like about chess is just standing there thinking, calculating, thinking again, calculating again, before making a move.

Unfortunately I have to settle for the least worst time control, i.e. 15|10 .

I agree I hate online chess tbh I stopped playing as much, I think to actually get better you have to do otb tournaments, not play with kids who mess up on move 3 and then have to sit there 30 mins which is NOT enough time. I like otb classical where I actually have time to think. I don't think a lot of players even know how to think critically of a chess position. People on here just play moves that they think look "good". That is not how you get better, that is how you stay the same.

"yeah rapid sucks, play classical instead"

This site does not have a classical pool, everything from 10/0 up to 60/0 is in the rapid category.

Which is why I prefer the other place. There have been rumours of a classical pool on chess.com, but they seem to be just that.

The rapid pool here comprises over 20 million players. The classical pool on the other site is well under 20,000 players. I am in the top 5% here but don't even make the top quartile there.

Rapid I can win quicker lol

classical gives you time to think and it feels good rather than jus loosing

rapid chess is the actual chess pinnacle of lets say chess.com for amatuers once someones a titled player otb victories and a good titled tuesday tournamanent is good for example i win titled tuesday i make money and beat strong players titled tuesday is a proffesional tournament the only online tournament besides a few otehrs that matter rapid is a closed pool so people dont play each other in fact no one in rapid is as good as they think rapid chess ratings otb are 200 points lesser of value than their online ratings for example im 2300 chess.com i may be 2200 otb or the opposite im 1900 chess.com but 2200 otb. rapid chess is defenetly pointless but amatuers view it as respectable even though its just blitz although it does help people to get better at chess learn from their mistakes its not as proffesionally important for growth as classical chess since once you reach 2000 or certain ratings you play either cheaters or people that blunder their pieces the quality of rapid chess is choas rapid chess is very good for otb training but once your a titled player even if your rated 2700 rapid you get nothing from playing rapid chess just revealing your prep you make tons of money from titled tuesday rapid chess is respected at amatuer chess becauser its convinent for improvement up until a certain point rapid chess often has no one to play with even if your magnuses rating online the ratings are overinflated and useless to discuss certain levels of chess so its completely rediclous rapid titled players rarely play it unless over the board wher ethe rprize money is worth most play in bullet brawl and blitz they dont reaveal their chess secrets their openings middle game ideals they save it for classical of course in theory you could play rapid without reavealing prep but thats really hard to do and would lead to a ton of draws until someone blunders rapid chess?? is practically dead on chess.com

That was an epic stream of thought, punctuation just couldn’t keep up, it saw that wall of text and said, “Nope, I’m out promise I'm not roasting it, I agreed with some of it and the rest was an interesting read.