Bullet Chess is definitely the variant of chess playing that most emphasizes time. At what point or in what situations do you think a transition from "playing for a checkmate" to "playing for a timeout" is appropriate?
Move 1.
Bullet Chess is definitely the variant of chess playing that most emphasizes time. At what point or in what situations do you think a transition from "playing for a checkmate" to "playing for a timeout" is appropriate?
Move 1.
Ya I see what you are saying but I'm talking about when you ditch all pretense of thinking and play the first move that comes to mind, or just random moves in general. At the beginning of a 2-minute game, for example, I do try and think about what I am doing very briefly before I move.
Well, you should always try to avoid instant moving unless you're just about to lose on time. So yeah, especially in 2 minute games you're going to have that very short pause of thinking time before you move. For a complex tactic you may even use a few seconds to get the move order right.
But you're asking at what point does it switch from playing for checkmate (i.e. the best moves you can find) vs playing to get ahead on time. The answer is like blueemu and BorgQueen said, that starts at move 1.
Bullet is really lame.
No.
Bullet Chess is definitely the variant of chess playing that most emphasizes time. At what point or in what situations do you think a transition from "playing for a checkmate" to "playing for a timeout" is appropriate?
From the beginning according to me. If u are completely winning, then go for mating and if u have less time then play quickly.
Bullet Chess is definitely the variant of chess playing that most emphasizes time. At what point or in what situations do you think a transition from "playing for a checkmate" to "playing for a timeout" is appropriate?