winning on time

I enjoy playing chess.  Time contraints change channge my style of play.  I particularly enjoy playing bullet/lightning because of how crazy they dynamics can be in such a short amount of time.  For example, I will sac my queen when there is little time left usually throwing my opponent off for just enough time that I need to win.

Seems to be that many, if not most people on this site, seem generally annoyed with people who use the clock as a strategy and that this is somehow "ungentlemanly" type of play.  This bums me out because it assumes there is a "right" way to play chess and I strive to play as a gentleman (often offering a draw when I know I can force a win, because I play to play, not to win).  I usually, daily, will have a player say something rude or hateful to me because I could pre-move faster than they could.

Just wanted some feedback from other plays who either run down the clock or are fed up with this type of play.

If that's their argument, tell them not to play bullet chess. *shrug*

I don't waste my time with them, other than maybe posting a comment on their userpage about how great of a sport or conversationalist they are.  It surprises me how many people play lightning who absolutely despise players who use time as a strategy.

I get it hsarA. Timed chess has a different dynamic, and online timed chess changes the game even more. So, I adapt.

I also play differently timed, the same as you. It's just adapting to the changes. Arguably, using time tactics may seem "cheap" and it is a tactic. Similar to planing a discovered attack or fork.

I admit, using time as a tactic can feel overly competitive both when it's in my favor and not. It can even feel a tad disrespectful. So I adapt to that too, by checking in with a greeting and sincere thanks or gg. Hopefully there's no hard feelings. 

@Joule5 I think that's really great of you, always good to talk with someone.  I don't know how many times I've sat and played 10+ games with someone with no response to my "GGs" or so much as a goodbye when they leave.  But I guess some people are here just for business, so I don't get too butt hurt.

I can see how the tactic can come off as "cheap", but in reality I think it's actually a difficult skill to build up.  As an example, I've played many people who try to take advantage of time by simply pushing each pawn as their first 8 moves, one space each.  If you know what you are doing this could be a decent tactic to bank some time (I've tried it myself, with very little success, but will always bust it out with any good hearted player i've played many games with).  But if you don't, your opponent has probably castled by now and you have very little development and given up some of your king's security for what you will hope to be a payoff in time.  Even if a player with low skill pulls off a "cheap" strategy like this, and wins, than good for them.  I lost many times to the pawn rush opening before learning how to defeat it.

Another strategy/tactic is really learning how pre-move works.  So often my opponents (and I) will play a certain amount of moves blind at the beginning of the game.  For this reason my response to e4 is often d5 because it throws off my opponent, especially if they have already pre-moved many moves ahead..

@yorygregovich   Agreed, and so far seems to be the consensus of people posting.  But when it comes time to paly, it just seems many people get upset with strategy/tactics that involve the clock.

I don't personally play chess to win, I play for the sake of play itself, but for thosee who play to win should use every tool available to them and in bullet the clock is inescapable.  

Hmm, I'm not sure what to make of your post.  What does it mean to kill a time player softly?  You seem very proud of your check mates, enough to make a list of them.  This makes me think that you somehow feel a win by check-mate is better than a win on time when it comes to bullet.

I'm not sure what a time player is.  Anyone who wants to be a successful bullet player has to be able to learn how to involve time as part of their strategy.  If it is their only strategy, they will likely falter. 

Yes, you are right!  I think the skills you need for lightning can translate to other time controls as well.

Fast doesn't have to mean reckless, but for some people that's exactly what it means.  Even so, sometimes these people are able to pull off a win, and I think it's this type of play that makes many people angry.

I often lose on time, opponent having 0.1 second left on the clock, when I am about to take the last piece of my opponent....
But that's part of the game, especially when playing bullet.

And bullet IS about time of course. Or, even better, a quick checkmate (I love those # in 10 moves games ). 

Mr_Lagging,

It seems to me you are missing the point: even a move that would be an obvious blunder in standard chess, when it comes to bullet might turn out to be the winning one.

Obviously, no one here is talking about "reckless" moves, just the opposite: you should consider other variables than those affecting a long term play, such as the surprise effect. You are well aware that an ordinary good move, in this case, would also be an easily predictable one, allowing your opponent to effectively pre-move. An alleged blunder instead, forces the player to quicly elaborate a new line or to commit a blunder himself.

I strongly agree with Joule5 when he points out that playing is not only adapting to the rules of the board, but to your opponents also. Once you are able to do so, you can decide how to interpret your concepts of correcteness and kindness. 

Using the clock as a tactic in bullet is to me no different than pushing a player out of bounds in American football. Its part of the rules and I do play to win. If I win by 0.3 seconds then I win, same as a checkmate. Many players will comment that it is cheap or weak especially if they up on material, but the object is to win not grab more pawns than your opponent. To them I say if you don't want to lose on time play longer games or move faster.

From http://www.chessquotes.com/topic-time :

The fact that a player is very short of time is to my mind, as little to be considered as an excuse as, for instance, the statement of the law-breaker that he was drunk at the time he committed the crime.  - Alexander Alekhine

Certainly, one might consider that such or such time control is not real chess but more piece-moving speed contest, but if you play it, you agree to obey by its rules.

You can’t lose on time as long as you play as fast as your opponent does. If you play too slowly, how is that your opponent’s fault?

Gotta be careful with "gg" tho... I don't think I need to explain

Sorry macer,

not getting it...

why is checkmate better than winning on time?

Yeah, some people, like this guy, get very angry when they lose on time! There was more, and worse if that's imaginable, lol. I just decided to give him a physics lesson since he wouldn't stop messaging me :) . 

lol, how "creative" some players are :)

I am not fast enough to play anything faster than a g/3 but even with that time control one side often wins by time. I quite agree that's its silly to call fowl when you lose on time, it is of course a crucial part of the game. However i just don't get the same satisfaction when i win a game because of time then i do with a nonobvious checkmate.

Lets face it Bullet and Blitz are not chess.No one racks thier brain on every move and if you do you will lose .