Really interesting read - IM Greg Shahade: "Slow Chess should die a fast death"!

@lovlas it actually does not make sense at all. If anything it could be used to prove the point that the author of that article was trying to make.

@kris9191 You are contradicting yourself.

@CafeMorphy Ok, I thought he was serious, but yeah...
I think we all got a bit trolled here :)
Well played @BestSiteEver
unless he is actually Greg after all (You never know...)

@scottdpt12 Like i said before, it is so interesting that so many people get so upset and emotional about something that is very simple and logical.

Most of them do not even play slow games, and do not even watch them. They will watch some game on youtube and just skip forward etc.

Of course, classic chess time controls will become shorter and once that becomes common practice and someone asks " hay can we have slow chess games that last for hours" the same people that complain now will say to them " OMG no! real chess is played for 15 min!1!"

If we watch our society everything is getting faster, not only chess but life as well. We could have access nowadays to the information meanwhile social network, instantly a tonne of info and so on in one click. I guess that the next generation would be able to think quicker and better than us.

@BestSiteEver Your arguments boil down to a mix of projection and assumptions about other players which isn't really conducive to a productive conversation.

@Haveniceday True. but it is not only that, what makes all this so fascinating is that people who are so against this are the same ones who basically only play fast chess and do not even watch classic chess tournaments.

If they end up watching some games it is after the game is over so they can fast forward it.

So they have zero arguments and it all boils down to a mix of projection and assumptions about other players which isn't really conducive to a productive conversation.

p.s. I only would not agree how the next generation would be able to think quicker and better than us. It would probably be the opposite.

@BestSiteEver Hi,

Chess is a game, and for many of us. We don't have all like objective, became master or GM.

Surely studying and playing classical game help you to get a better knowledge of chess and so on.

But this is us "the crowd" that makes chess exist and not the opposite. People do prefer play bullet and get some beers, let's do it.

I love how ones opinion gets attacked these days. Makes for a great discussion...

Look, from the average persons perspective, 5-6 hour games are incredibly boring. If anyone actually wants the game to get more attention from a wider audience (which most people here don't) then shorten the games so that the "average" person can watch them. I'm not advocating getting rid of 6 hour games, just want to make the whole game more accessible to a larger audience. And for clarity, this is my OPINION. Attacking someones ability at this game has nothing to do with it. Yes, I suck at chess...I'm well aware, thanks.

I can't stop quoting:

"Don't get obsessed with playing at fast time rates ('Blitz Chess'). Such games are of some use only to high graded players..." (Ilya Maizelis)

And I'm convinced that there are some high graded players here on lichess.org from the old Soviet Union that can contribute to this theme...

I've read now all old and new chess myths whatsoever. Good players play regularly blitz games patzers could dream endlessly of... It just quick motion. And compared to computers we are all clowns who push wood. So what's the problem?

I played 200 rated "classic" tournaments, I play rapid as well and I play blitz online. Why actually do all people discuss stuff with "OR" and not with "AND"?