Depends on what your goal is.
If you're in it for the adrenaline, play 1 min.
If you're serious about improving (tactics for example) then ask yourself what time control is most likely to help you improve that. Perhaps 5 min is best, but maybe it's 3 min.
If you're serious about improving some other aspect of your play besides tactics, Bullet is probably not the best choice.
Unless you just do it to pass the time, like me. :-)
I think long games are the best because it really is possible to stare at a position for 10 minutes and still not know the very best move. For me there is so much to think about, others may just get impatient and bash out a reasonable move. But everyone is entitled to their opinion. If bullet is your favorite then you certainly don't need to listen to anyone who tells you not to play it!
Play bullet or blitz if you enjoy it.
"Why spend 30 minutes playing a Standard game when you can finish up a match quickly in less than 2 minutes?" Because I want to play as well as I am able, and 2 minutes, or even 30 minutes, is not sufficient for me to calculate in key positions. To my mind, bullet and even blitz is too much about the clock. I read here about strategies, sometimes including inferior or speculative moves, designed to cause the opponent to "burn" his time.
Recreationally OTB, I often played without any clock, and if we used one, my opponent and I usually opted for the time control of the local monthly tournament -- G90. I found that even G30 hurt my "serious" game because the clock became too intrusive.
Is it "a waste of time," or does it ruin "the beauty (a.k.a. Heart & Soul) of Chess???" To my way of thinking, yes on both questions. Only you can answer this for yourself, as we may have different ideas concerning what "chess" is or should be.
There are some activities that are enjoyable while they are ongoing. Why would I want them to end in just 2 minutes?
I think bullet chess still serves a purpose for serious players.
For one thing, you'll know right away whether or not you're comfortable with opening strategy. If you can successfully execute an opening in fifteen seconds then you have at least a fundamental grasp of it. And it teaches you, I think, to narrow your focus. Articles on chess.com have talked about how masters don't consider more moves--they just intuitively focus deeper on the moves they feel are going to be important. I think bullet can help you do that.
However, I think it will help much more if you look back over your games. If you give yourself the chance to look back and see "Wow, I could have checkmated her there but I lost" then there's a possibility you'll see that move or something similar next time. So I believe bullet is still useful as long as you study and stay aware. And I think it's fun--which is the whole reason I play chess anyway.
Bullet chess makes chess sound cool to people who don't know anything about it.
[snip!]
Chess is a deliberative game. Moves have long term consequences.
[snip!]
Those who play 1 0 would disagree with this sentiment. How long term can the consequences be if I don't remember it in 5 minutes?
If bullet is so worthless then why are there so many levels of skill in it -- it's not like everyone is just throwing pieces around with no time to think. If there can be thousands of rating points of difference between players clearly there is a lot of skill involved. Think about it 
But I agree it's nothing like "real" chess and just for fun. Ozzie and Estragon make good points. "It depends what you're looking" for and "chess moves have long term consequences"
I think that bullet chess is mostly based on quick reflexes. No real chess skill involved really.
To my mind, bullet and even blitz is too much about the clock. I read here about strategies, sometimes including inferior or speculative moves, designed to cause the opponent to "burn" his time.
I agree with Bur_Oak here.
I've won blitz/bullet games just by checking my opponent as much as possible when the clocks are low, giving no regard for position or material.
You'd be surprised how many people panic when they're suddenly in check.
if you like 1 min chess games like me then listen to no one telling you its bad,what a crock of S**t, were told our hole lifes whats good and not,if you like some thing,then enjoy.x
Bit like saying why have a 90 minute FA cup final when you can just decide winner by penalties. Or why spend the whole night making love with the wife when you can just belt one off. Just because you can do it in a minute, doesn't make you good.
IMO bullet chess is no way representative of the users understanding of chess, if kasparov or that gormless looking one had a crap internet connection and dodgy mouse, PC on 2000 would stuff him. Can't see how it can improve openings or strategy, your more likely to outblunder/random move your opponent to victory. I've seen example games on here where people who excel in bullet chess do the same openings against similar rated players in correspondance chess, and then wonder why then get whooped so easily.
What next, 2 second bullet chess?
There I said it.
Let's not forget Bullet with increment (1-1). That's a different beast altogether and I actually think is more helpful for one's chess than just plain bullet.
The delay/increment tends to reward the better "chess" player and somewhat decreases the chances of hustling and race-condition nonsense like distracting moves. The bigger the delay (5 seconds like USCF rated tournaments), the less likely the usual cheap tricks will work.
To the OP's question : Slow chess tends to be more efficient at helping you learn because you're giving your brain time to burn in patterns and cement ideas as you spend more time per position. Bullet ... not so much.
I think that bullet chess is mostly based on quick reflexes. No real chess skill involved really.
Who told you that chess reflex is not a skill? I think you're misinformed.
just defferent people ,some like queit, some like loud and exciting,in the dna i'm sure
The Speed Kicks In - 1 Min Bullet: Addicted to Speed, Chess Fun v Super Bot. https://youtu.be/a_vm5aXip_U
I heard people telling me not to play Bullet games, saying it was a waste of time, or that it ruins the beauty (a.k.a. Heart & Soul) of Chess???
I love Bullet, it give me the Adrenaline. Also, why spend 30 minutes playing a Standard game when you can finish up a match quickly in less than 2 minutes?