Can't play the Leonhardt Gambit without 3. Nc3!
Do not get me wrong, but you showed 0 science.
A scientific approach would be, for example, a comparation approach of increasing in rating between players who play more or less bullet. With a lot of data and a good statistical analyze.
A scientific approach would be, for example, a comparation approach of increasing in rating between players who play more or less bullet. With a lot of data and a good statistical analyze.
@ThePracticeGuy i am talking about the forum
@ajmbek so do you disagree and say bullet is good?
@Joelethan said in #104:
> @ajmbek so do you disagree and say bullet is good?
I guess that the answer is yes cuz he has more than 3.000 bullet games.
> @ajmbek so do you disagree and say bullet is good?
I guess that the answer is yes cuz he has more than 3.000 bullet games.
@Schachsuchti64 said in #2:
> Well obviously the science must be WRONG, because playing lots of Bullet ABSOLUTELY improves your chess!
How would Bullet help you, exactly? Give me 5 reasons. Don't answer? HA! Science was right!
> Well obviously the science must be WRONG, because playing lots of Bullet ABSOLUTELY improves your chess!
How would Bullet help you, exactly? Give me 5 reasons. Don't answer? HA! Science was right!
This post is really good, and I like how informitive it is. :) Yes, bullet isn't good for you. What's better: Making moves so fast, you don't really comprehend them because your racing against time, or taking your time, and playing the best moves.
I agree. Bullet makes your playing worse. But unfortunately, most people will have to say something horrible about this post. If you have a rating like above 2000 you can play bullet a BILLION times. But 1000-2000? No way! Bullet makes you impulsive. No critical thinking just impulsiveness and blunders. No real chess value(then again...)
@Catattack386 said in #107:
> How would Bullet help you, exactly? Give me 5 reasons. Don't answer? HA! Science was right!
1. You improve your intuition which most people these days lack.
2. As @pawngrid said in #35:
What's the difference between a blitz game with 2 seconds left for each player and a bullet? If someone practices
bullet, wouldn't they be well prepared for that situation?
3. What I said in #26:
I have been playing bullet chess for 2 years on board and off-board and have been one of the best in my chess
school (well, I am the #2 best in my school).
isn't that proof that I have gotten better at chess since playing as a complete beginner?
4. What @ajmbek said in #102:
Do not get me wrong, but you showed 0 science.
A scientific approach would be, for example, a comparation approach of increasing in rating between players who play more or less bullet. With a lot of data and a good statistical analyze.
5. What I said in #93:
Well, there is no proof that bullet makes you worse.
So... I don't know what science was right.
Plus, try to prove me wrong.
> How would Bullet help you, exactly? Give me 5 reasons. Don't answer? HA! Science was right!
1. You improve your intuition which most people these days lack.
2. As @pawngrid said in #35:
What's the difference between a blitz game with 2 seconds left for each player and a bullet? If someone practices
bullet, wouldn't they be well prepared for that situation?
3. What I said in #26:
I have been playing bullet chess for 2 years on board and off-board and have been one of the best in my chess
school (well, I am the #2 best in my school).
isn't that proof that I have gotten better at chess since playing as a complete beginner?
4. What @ajmbek said in #102:
Do not get me wrong, but you showed 0 science.
A scientific approach would be, for example, a comparation approach of increasing in rating between players who play more or less bullet. With a lot of data and a good statistical analyze.
5. What I said in #93:
Well, there is no proof that bullet makes you worse.
So... I don't know what science was right.
Plus, try to prove me wrong.