Pre-move -who came up with that idea?

[Nick Burrows]

Ive had 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2 Bg4 3.e3 Bxd1 3 times

[JustinHorton]

On which side?

[Nick Burrows]

Black!

[John Clarke]

So who did come up with the idea of 'pre-move' and if it can cost you the game on the spot, aren't we better off without it?

Sounds to me like a bastard child of Simon Webb's "barrage technique", as explained in Chess For Tigers - first published 1978.

And to enlarge a bit on what Mr McCready says: bullet chess isn't the only competitive activity in which reflexes count more than genuine ability. Those quiz formats where the first to buzz in gets to answer are another. Skill at guessing where the question's headed and when the crucial word will be uttered; quizmaster's vocal inflections; even the movements of his facial muscles - and of course sheer speed of reaction - all these can be (and often are) more important than actual knowledge.

[MJMcCready]

Oh yes Webb's barrage technique, and to think I spent at least two seasons using it at every opportunity.I suppose there is a similarity although from what I recall when I last read that book Simon's point was based in your opponent falling into time trouble whereas in bullet chess you start off in time-trouble.

At the highest level its probably nothing more than a bit of harmless fun, its just a shame to see a cultured intellectual pursuit being reduced down to cannon fodder for a mass-media driven society. That does not constitute progress to me. It constitutes, greed, egoism, and a lack of sensibility. I repeat if you could bring back to life all the former world champions and show them how popular bullet chess and premove have become, I think they would be ashamed at what they saw, and rightly so.

[JustinHorton]

. It constitutes, greed, egoism, and a lack of sensibility

It's one-minute chess for fun on the internet, not Gordon Gekko.

[MJMcCready]

. It constitutes, greed, egoism, and a lack of sensibility

It's one-minute chess for fun on the internet, not Gordon Gekko.

'Chess for fun'? I've always interpreted that as an oxymoron. I thought it was the case that there must be a prize-fund involved if the chess-playing elite are participating. If there is no prize-fund then the only remaining motive must be a title, whether that title constitutes any significance is another matter, but with no prize-fund or title up for grabs, I don't think any of the top players would be there.

[Richard Bates]

How does that work? The moment you reach a certain standard chess can no longer be enjoyed for what it is?

Sure it is the case that the possibilities for monetisation of internet chess now are huge, but this is a fairly recent development, particularly with the ability to broadcast simultaneously. The “chess playing elite” as you put it, could be found regularly on the internet playing blitz/bullet chess long before this emerged as a thing, and for nothing. And even before the internet was a thing, blitz was a bit of light relief away from the serious business. The main restriction I would suggest was not lack of remuneration, but fear for some that too much blitz could damage their “serious” chess strength.

[MJMcCready]

I am aware there is a history to it all. Perhaps it's just me being obstinate but I can't help but feel something is fundamentally wrong with the bullet chess/premove stuff. Perhaps you are right, it's a release of pressure not taken seriously, which in itself makes it fun. Perhaps its just me but it all seems very reckless and unworthy of attention but for professional players I take your point it may function as a release of sorts.

[Ian Thompson]

['Chess for fun'? I've always interpreted that as an oxymoron. I thought it was the case that there must be a prize-fund involved if the chess-playing elite are participating. If there is no prize-fund then the only remaining motive must be a title, whether that title constitutes any significance is another matter, but with no prize-fund or title up for grabs, I don't think any of the top players would be there.

Three other obvious possibilities for their participation:

1. They're being paid a fee.
2. Their sponsor wants them to do it to publicise them (e.g. sponsor logos on shirts).
3. They think its worth doing for free because it will bring them future benefits.

[Leonard Barden]

['Chess for fun'? I've always interpreted that as an oxymoron. I thought it was the case that there must be a prize-fund involved if the chess-playing elite are participating. If there is no prize-fund then the only remaining motive must be a title, whether that title constitutes any significance is another matter, but with no prize-fund or title up for grabs, I don't think any of the top players would be there.

Three other obvious possibilities for their participation:

1. They're being paid a fee.
2. Their sponsor wants them to do it to publicise them (e.g. sponsor logos on shirts).
3. They think its worth doing for free because it will bring them future benefits.

4 They are good at it, and enjoy it.

As it happens, today's Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... za-firouja
reports in detail on last week's 194-game bullet marathon between Magnus Carlsen and Alireza Firouzja. If you think bullet is rubbish, view the video link at the end of para 6.

[MJMcCready]

Yep, all fair points. It's probably just the philosopher in me pushing through and questioning the form of and values attached to Bullet chess rather than focus on the differing reasons why people do things. When Botvinnik once said Blitz chess, 'I played it on a train once' that sentiment I sympathize with but of course the game has moved on, and I certainly did overlook the point the playing elite do have sponsors, and may sometimes participate on their behalf. In any event I can't see bullet chess/pre-move options as a proof of progress in the modern game, if anything quite the opposite.

[Joey Stewart]

Pre moving can be absolute bs when the other player manages to trap you in a cycle of pre moves where his time never moves anymore, but it does also come with its own unique tricks - for example rather then playing checks (which a lot of blitz players anticipate you will do in a time scramble) play instead a move that blocks the escape square they would have used if you had checked them which invariably wastes them precious seconds... Nothing feels better then to outcheat a cheater!