You can think of chess as a balance of factors. As the time approaches 0 the relevance of the clock approaches 100%. As the time approaches infinity the relevance of chess skill approaches 100%.
There are lots of pretty amusing examples. In ultrabullet on here the #11 player is 1900 blitz. 4 of the top 10 players created new accounts which masks all their other ratings, but I imagine our 1900 is not alone. In a bullet on ICC (which probably had even more high elo players than Lichess does) a player who hovered around the top 10 was 1900 USCF at the time.
So is 1 min chess? Sure, even 0.1s is chess. It's just chess where the clock is the dominant factor.
Here is a 1+0 game of 960 I just won using only 3 seconds from my clock. Bow before my supreme mastery of chess. Watch as I leave my opponent trembling in fear, without even capturing a piece or indeed moving anything other than pawns.
Think about this metaphor:
A player can get in and out of a car faster than the opponent. Unfortunately they never reached the true destination in time, but we will assume the faster of the two would be the one that would have reached the destination first.
The destination of chess is to checkmate the opponent.
Any thing other than that is a mistake created during the game. The game started as a draw, why exchange all the pieces to end it in a draw. Might as well not play.
Various rule's for chess like draws, clocks, handicapping and 960 have been added to accommodate different ways of playing with the pieces, not the game. If a rule is different, it becomes a different variant of chess.
Chess may now have different names like: 960, Crazyhouse, Increment-chess, Leisure-chess, Pressure-Chess or Lichess. If we play the game backwards, we could even call it Restructure-chess. If we are playing with medieval pieces, why not call it: Renaissance-chess.
When a person speaks another language would their name change? (Example, a fine name like Walter). Well if the language is the clock, than the answer should remain the same.
With Chess, other languages have given the game another name. It might be time to give it a universal name. One that can include all its varying rules.
Humanoid-chess : Having an appearance or character resembling that of chess, that is played only by humans.
Android-chess: Having an appearance or character resembling that of chess, that is not played by humans.
Automated-chess: ...
Bullet chess is a really good marker of whether a player is cheating or not.
Either,
1) The player is too slow at using his engine and loses on time with near perfect play. Their ACPL also rises exponentially in time scramble when they decide to take matters in their own hands.
2) The player uses an engine that automatically plays the best moves thus constituting inhuman perfect play which is also easy to spot
It's difficult to mix human and engine moves like cheaters do in higher time controls. Thus, bullet is a very necessary part of any online playing system.
If bullet is not chess then why does bullet strength predict classical chess strength? If you don't believe me give me an example of a top hundred player that has a lower then 2500 bullet rating. There is none.
@GMScuzzBall Ok. I checked, #1 classical player is
@ClassyPlaysHis/her bullet is 2313, which is lower than 2500.
No need to go lower than classical #1 to disprove your claim.
1 minute chess is to chess as dollhouse is to house... Looks like it, but it's not really a house if you know what I mean.
@hangrad lichess ratings do not mean anything. Try this list instead
2700chess.com/ @lurarose bullet chess is chess for busy people who do not have too much time. Also rich people who have lots of good equipment.
@hangrad, I think GMScuzzball meant the top hundred pros.
