I don't say that 0.30+0 is not chess, but statistically, there are more than 4.5 millions of games that have been finished by a clock flag, and "only" 1.5 million of games when the opponent get mated, according to the advanced research, in games with 0.30+0 time set.. So, basically #5 is more right.
look hansen vs nakamura.. they do some crazy tactics..its insane. For me it is real chess.
I think it is not real chess. I hate bullet games because you don't have time to think of your moves so you just end up losing all your games.
The aim of chess is not to checkmate the opponent, but to win which can be accomplished by checkmate , resignation or flagging. If the goal was only to checkmate and you had a forced mating sequence so your opponent resigned, this would not be counted as a win so to say the goal is only to checkmate the opponent makes no sense.
that was awesome mate
While most thirty second games may end in a loss on time, anyone who plays bullet knows how many players will let their clocks run to zero even when they're one move away from being mated.
Chess is chess. Bullet is as much about speed as a long time control is about out-sitting your opponent.
Chess is chess. Bullet is as much about speed as a long time control is about out-sitting your opponent.
All this games are perfect examples showing that bullet is not chess.
Agree with #18.
Chess and bullet differ more than tennis and ping pong.
Chess and bullet differ more than tennis and ping pong.
@tpr Dude, the rules are the same. The objective is the same. The game is the same. The only thing that changes when you cut down the time control is the moves the players make.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.