classic games?

I just can't understand why someone would want to play a 5+3. You either like chess or you don't. Chess games aren't over in 10 minutes. That's not even an opening.

#2 is completely and utterly correct.

As to #7: you can put 45+45 or whatever you want as your time control. People will still play it as if it's blitz. This is the experience of players from top to bottom. Simply put, the distant nature of the internet doesn't leave people as invested as sitting down does.

If we did separate them, too many players would be able to get to the top ratings without ever playing an actually long game. The majority, I dare say. And we wouldn't want to punish people for not using their clock time. But that's what would happen -- you can count on it.

I will also add that 'blitz', 'classic', all that are just words, yet you imply that they are set in stone -- and language never is. What 'blitz' and 'classic' are are very much in the eye of the beholder.

Also, you have played 9 games here and have 114 forum posts. What's up with that?

@ #13: I don't understand the question. Nothing's "up".

#14 That was an addendum, but you can't deny it's a little bizarre.

Moreover, you didn't rebut any of the arguments presented in #12. I want to see your response.

@ #15: Oh, you thought I was going to invest time and energy into debating this with you? I'm not. It's not worth it.

I know that in the 45/45 and 90/30 leagues on both ICC and FICS, there isn't any problem with people playing the game "like blitz".

And honestly, what I find most odd is someone who claims to like chess spending all of their time playing hundreds of blitz games on the internet. That's super odd.

#16 then your argument stands on very shaky ground.

The problem is that the rating system loses a lot of its integrity when masses and masses of people are wholly ignoring the large amount of time you are given to do your moves.

You recognise this un-use of time happens on ICC and FICS as well -- and many chess streams I watch confirm this fact. I wonder why you haven't equally lost faith in their leagues.

So I wonder: since you deem blitz and bullet to be 'not chess' (which is a false, biased and elitist assertion), why do you give the blitz players with long time controls a pass? It is in effect the same thinking time, but with less time pressure.

Again, dude - I have a life. I'm not spending my Sunday arguing with some rando on the internet about nothing. Go find something to do with your life.

Fortunately some pure ambassadors of chess will bring the art through the centuries as it was meant to be, not falling into the temptation of time pressure. Maybe even revert it to the good old Chaturanga.
You are our hero #16.
Funny how you think you can judge how people are supposed to like chess, play how you like and let others play how they like.
Playing bullet is still more chess than trolling on a chess forum.

"What I find most odd is someone who claims to like art spending all of their time doing cartoons on the internet. That's super odd."

"What I find most odd is someone who claims to like food spending all of their time in bistros. That's super odd."

"What I find most off is someone who claims to like music spending all of their time listening to nothing but Singles - no albums, or concertos. That's super odd."

Chess and blitz are interlinked but different. It's fine, you don't need to like both. You're very welcome to make a 90+30, and I can guarantee that you will get a game in under a minute. How your opponent plays isn't up to the site.

If you're not going to invest time and energy into something, why even bother complaining about it? If you want a solution, you collaborate with someone to solve a problem. Otherwise you're literally moaning just because you want to moan - you know "I am so tired..." "Well, take a nap?" "Oh, no, I have no energy to take a nap! But I am so tired..."