Useless moves just to win on time - Is that even chess?

I know some of you will say its just the way it is. But when you completely winning and your opponnent just makes fast useless moves and checks to make you run out of time even if you lose you know you actually played better. What they are doing is not even chess and it does not reflect their rating even though their rating goes higher but not because of chess ability.

What do you guys think? I think its ridiculous.

Those "fast useless moves and checks" made you lose the game.
I'd say they were quite effective.

The clock is as much part of the game as the pieces. Respect it or play without clock. Agreeing to something and complaining afterwards is the real ridiculous issue.

You will hardly find any followers. Case closed.

That is part of the game, if you do not like it, play with a longer time control and an increment, a few seconds of increment essentially eliminates this issue.

#3 ... or play with an increment. Even a +1 increment makes it difficult for an opponent randomly playing moves to win.

Literally entire forum topics have been written because players are uninterested in using an increment clock (perhaps due to difficulty finding opponents, I don't know).

@Toadofsky

??? All competitive chess is played with an increment today. On Chess.com it's filled with increment Chess and it's a known fact that finding games of any time control w/ increment is no problem here on Lichess. There's absolutely no lack of interest in playing with an increment or delay and that's how the game is truly played. That said, the OP is ridiculous because if you play a 5/0 (for example) it's a different style of play than a traditional game and winning on time is an effective strategy. But let's not pretend that a 3/0 or 5/0 is even a shell of a game compared to a 5+3 or 3+2, which is why FIDE prefers the latter.

Obviously, we don't want competitive games for real ratings to be so heavily influenced by the clock as they would in a short, 0 delay/increment game. All that leads to is either no endgame, or a microwaved fast food endgame and in doing so, we're completely whitewashing over the most important part of the game and in essence, just seeing who can move faster without getting mated rather than who's the better Chess player.

I’ve played over 15,000 games on lichess and my best win ever was against a 2200 where I flagged him with 1 pawn versus 2 Queens, 2 rooks, a knight and 4 pawns.

He rage quitted too which made it 10X better

I think that playing useless moves to win on time is an effective strategy. If you lose on time in this way, it just means that you need more practice on the time control you are playing with. Remember, the chess clock is there for a reason;) If you really dislike it, play with a longer time control.

Well, in (ultra) Bullet exactly that is paramount. Useless moves but quickly played.

Well, I guess you might be referring to this game: lichess.org/9kr7IYTx/black#43

At the time when you were a rook and a piece up, you had 4 minutes left of 5.
Then at move 22 and 1:38 left it took you 25 seconds to check your opponent, when a queen trade would have left you absolutely winning.
A couple of moves later at 1:05 you spent another 25 seconds taking a rook after a successful fork.
From the point where you had 0:30 and your opponent had 3:40 left and barely K+P+Q versus virtually everything, you knew that his only chance was to win on time.

My opinion is that you wasted your time. Rather than complaining about your opponent, you should blame yourself.

A closing remark (edit):
Had you stripped your opponent of his queen and pawn by any method (e.g. Q trade and P v R sacrifice) then the worst case would have been a draw on timeout.