I invented an extremely dubious gambit!

I call it the kevlu8 gambit: it starts off with lichess.org/study/ajaquMM3/ck7SpwQ4 , and is extremely useful in bullet for people who tend to premove openings. I've managed to bait many people with traps like this lichess.org/study/ajaquMM3/8dpgbFma and also traps like this: lichess.org/study/ajaquMM3/EmyXVVc7 , but if you're playing a rapid or classical game you probably shouldn't play it because it is easily refuted by Nd7 or e6

From Lichess Players TableBase I saw that this position is occurred in some games but there are just bullet or Hyperbullet games and also in Masters TableBase there's no such game.So you are correct the doesn't work in Rapid and Classical games!

I accidentally invented a gambit that works in classical too - the game is given below.

I am really bad at this, as I tend to use wrong terms, more fun bearing, and also i have a hard time sticking to a strict regimen of terminology, when there is a whole platter of similar or slightly more lively terms on the table too. So I will try to make some stories here.

I like your contrasting of time controls as promoting different games tactics or strategies.

mine now: Fast 2 piece based combos, while the other is cramped AND wasting time taking the gambit (keeping cramped, or clunky rook close quarter defence --- basically cramped too).

Thin escapes (e6) less visible with time stress.

Could this brings the notion of robustness of an opening on the forefront. On average, you win more games, even against an equal adversary, IF that adversary takes the pawn.

Or one could then argue that taking the pawn was the bad move. And your traps depend on that delay in black development. Would that be an argument for defensive play, in bullet. or redundancy of defensive moves (more supported advance?).

I thought bullet was about bullying, pushing time Damocles in the other's face? (it looks like that to me because rapid to me is already stressful, maybe I am biased). This would argue to look for robust play that does not rely on finding a needle in a hay stack by calculation depth (on your side). maybe.. just trying..