The World Blitz Championships is now played at the standard time control of 3 +2 second increment. If you are playing over the board, it's best to play with an increment.
Most tournament players don't play with an increment when playing online though, for the very good reason that it's a bit more difficult to cheat when there's no increment.
So, there's a very good practical reason to play with no increment in fast online games, but that reason is removed when playing over the board.
Yea, that's what I thought. You're looking for excuses to be mean to others. I ask again, why do I need to justify what I like to do?
To play with an increment and call it blitz is ridiculous imo . I dont like that rapid chess ( quick chess ) also has increments these days .
To play with an increment and call it blitz is ridiculous imo . I dont like that rapid chess ( quick chess ) also has increments these days .
Agreed. anything below 10 min should be played without an increment. 15|10 is the lowest i like to play w/ increment. in OTB, the 10 is baisically just time to record the last move.
There are plenty of World Championship Blitz games available for viewing on youtube. The games don't look "ridiculous" to me.
In fact, the 3 +2 increment is even used in the standard World Championship matches.
One reason for increments even in blitz is to do away with the draw by insufficient winning chances rule. If there are really insufficient winning chances, prove it on the board. If your opponent just shuffles back and forth, you will actually gain time!
Its no longer blitz if it has increments imo , classic blitz is 5-0 , no silly increments and no silly delays ... they need to rename it , call it something else ...
Why does playing with or without increments need to be justified ether way?
Indeed. They are just different time controls and players adjust accordingly.
You guys gotta be board
The reason i play without it because i'm terrible at time managment. I've lost too many games where i've had huge advantage. Of course increment would help me to win those games but it also shows that my converting technique is sucks otherwise i had won them despite lack of time. An effective technique is also fast. And i'd like to learn how to think faster.
I'm looking forward to playing Live in the near future.
According to chessgames.com, the very first chess tournament ever played with clocks had time added on per moves. So that guy who said "in the old days the clocks were different" is either mistaken or missing the point.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1012412
Increments make a lot of sense.
In actual days, at least here in Argentina, far than half of chess clocks are like this:
Can people justify this way of playing?
Seems like for any really long game (lots of moves) it'll be just a race for time. Even a 2 second increment can at least mean you don't lose when you're two queens up.
But there are players who exploit the increment game too, and deliberately run their time down to near zero, because they're experts at playing 2-seconds per move chess. One is no better than the other and I prefer no increment, although I'd happily play 5+2 or 5+3 if anyone would play that, but they won't. It's hard to get a game at 5+2.
I dont understand you. If someone wants to decrese his time to almost zero than do it? I mean its nothing to do with my time.
We both have 5/2 min
If he wants to wait 5 min on move 3 and have 2sec for the rest of the game / move thats fine by me 
People play without increment for lack of online tournaments with increment.
Can people justify this way of playing?
Seems like for any really long game (lots of moves) it'll be just a race for time. Even a 2 second increment can at least mean you don't lose when you're two queens up.
It's bad a bad player that loses while two Queens up.
Good players do not need increments
It's bad a bad player that loses while two Queens up.
Good players do not need increments
This is patently false. Let’s imagine a player has slowly outplayed his opponent and had two seconds on his clock. His opponent sacs his Q to drag out the game a few moves. It may take two or three seconds just to process what happened, and the good player loses on time.
That sort of cheapo works when there is no increment, but doesn’t work if there is an increment.
Playing with increment is a different technique .... arguably less chess-like than without an increment. In online chess, 5 mins is effectively bullet, because of the delay in moving unless you have a special system maybe with touch screen.If an increment were more popular, there'd be more tournaments with it.
An increment certainly changes the game.
Five minutes is slow blitz, not bullet.
For most of the past twenty years my online play has been principally 3 0: blitz without an increment. I win many games running out my opponent’s clock when I have a dead lost position, and my opponents do the same to me. Add an increment, such as 3 2, which is a popular Arena time control on this site, and you have to win with better moves. Losing on time with a clear advantage is rare. 3 2 is like 5 0 until the time gets short, then the lack of an increment is worth a rook if you have more time than your opponent.
A few years ago, I played a lot of bullet at 1 0. By my mid-50s, however, I found the youngsters could flag me too easily. Now, my bullet is 2 1, which is really more like 3 0 blitz, with fewer flags.
As we all know what Optimissed is saying is nonsense, I suggest just ignoring it. Intentional trolls do exist, and there's no point arguing anyway either way.