# How come no one plays 45 minute games?

>>I prefer the 45/45 option

What do those time options mean with pipe separator?

I have the options 15|10 3|2 2|1 1|1 45|45 5|5

What do the 2 numbers represent?

Its not because of cheating that people play bullet. Its because they find it fun to try to flag the opponent and play quick and good. Personally, there is no way i could ever even play a 10 minute game. Usually i dont have that much time and these longer time controls are meant only for tournament play. Online, 45 min and 30 min is very long and boring which is why many people choose to play blitz and also why games are found every couple of seconds in blitz, whereas every 5-10 minutes for a 45|45 game

Heinkel111 wrote:

>>I prefer the 45/45 option

What do those time options mean with pipe separator?

I have the options 15|10 3|2 2|1 1|1 45|45 5|5

What do the 2 numbers represent?

The first number is minutes; the second is an increment of seconds added after every move. So 45/45 is forty-five minutes with 45 seconds added after every move.

^Thanks.

Makes a lot of sense.

Those sound like sensible playing parameters.

I had my first 60 min game tonight. Only took chess.com 1 minute to find an opponent.

A very tense affair.. I got his queen in 8 minutes. A 20minute delay ensued but then he fought back  well and won material back and I had to think long and hard and it was getting down to the wore in the end but I managed to squeeze out the win.

It was a much more intense game than the 30min games I have had since joining recently.

^I guess that is possible. But seems a bit pointless if people are more interested in the number beside their name than actually engaging in genuine competition and finding how good they actually are and watching themselves improve through practise.

I don't know bullet chess. I guess it is some super-rapid form of playing. But is that really playing chess?

The strength of your play is likely to be more about how familiar you are with the various openings and their variations which is more about rote memory than actual analytic thought.

I find the idea of chess 960 interesting for that very reason. There is almost no scope for relying on rote memory of openings.

I have played casual games at a rapid time control on a different site where you can play totally anonymously by not logging in.

You might think a recipe for engine use - after all you won't get caught or banned. However without the egotistic issue of having your name in lights for your fine win or in disgrace for playing badly and losing, you'll find most anonymous players actually play totally honestly.

Have anonymous chess games here - not stored, no ratings, etc. And you'll get more fair play.

If you really want, have the anonymous user set their own rating just to help find a match. Ok so the engine-users can set theirs at 2700 and hope Magnus Carlsen or Nakamura turns up.. The rest of us would just play for fun.

Setting ratings? But the Cheat Detectors would catch them before they get to that height. Plus, Carlsen and Nakamura have played a lot of engines before. They could probably hold them off.

It’s so sad that the engine-users are spoiling it for people, who want to play chess ,as is ought to be played, , with longer
time controls, because for me , that is real chess .

45 min is way too long. 10 minutes for each side is more than enough time to calculate. 15 also good. No chess game should exceed a half-hour, except for daily games. I like daily cause u can play 100 games simultaneously