time vs check mate

Why does beating somebody by time vs checkmate seem like cheating?   Anybody else feel this way?

One of the greatest inventions in the history of chess was the chess clock. A chess player has to make all of his moves in a given amount of time or forfeit.

There's a type of sudden-death time control called "armageddon" that is used as the final tie-break even in world championships. White gets 5 minutes and Black gets 4 minutes for the entire game. Black has draw odds though. If White doesn't checkmate in time, he loses the match. I've played in and seen armageddon games where White needed just one more move to deliver checkmate but the flag was called first.

If both sides agree to play with a certain time control, then a game decided by the clock is fair.

I can understand that a time loss may be unpleasant in that, as a growing chess player, you see the truth of the position, and yet see that you don't have the time to physically exploit that beautiful truth. That even happens to me; in fact, that feeling may correlate positively with playing ability! But I can never complain about that when I willingly sign up to play 3 0 blitz. The point is, time is integrated into the game: A winning position might be a losing position if you only have five seconds left. The challenge is either achieving a winning position WITHOUT leaving yourself with no time to exploit, or to win on time yourself.

I do think winning on time is a skill, because playing fast moves can often put you at risk of losing tons of pieces and being mated extremely quickly. Any good "time player," someone who wins on time a lot, also plays decent moves, but not more decent than they have to be to get the job done.

I truly think that if you don't enjoy playing chess games where time exploitation is an effective strategy (in a slow time control game, it wouldn't be), you should simply avoid them, and play with other time formats. This includes blitz and bullet chess.

It's why a beginner juggler wouldn't learn how to juggle 12 balls at a time by means of constantly trying to do so and failing. It's easier for him to understand the technique if it's broken down, and if he starts with maybe two slower balls instead. A brain can't comprehend what the hell to do with 12 balls all at once -- it has to be built up to with an understanding of the basics.

In chess, I would say exposing yourself to concepts slowly enough for your mind to process them comes before the speed. Once you know the concepts, you can work on condensing them better for a practical game.

So... being good at making someone waste their precious time is ...good? 

Not sure what you mean by "waste their precious time." Do you mean playing chess? As I said, time chess is a balance of both time and quality -- you can't just make all moves in a few seconds and win if the moves are truly terrible.

By wasting his precious time, I meant make my opponent use too much time trying to get around sticky traps and end up losing on time.

You may not play enough long games to take blitz for what it is, just a fun distraction.  Speed games are never meant to discover the truth of a position, they're to play fun fast flashy moves just a little bit faster than the opponent.  Play in some OTB tournaments or CC to get that satisfying justice of the position feeling.

I've perused many instructional chess books, websites, and forums for 10 years and have never heard this nonsense said by anyone lol :)

I don't. If you don't like winning (or losing) on time stop playing timed games. "Seems like cheating" is your problem, not anyone else's. Sorry but I don't know how to put it any more tactfully.

I'm pretty sure if your time tips but you have checkmate in the move you were about to make that is a checkmate and a win. I'm confident to say that's the rules in Sweden :)

If you have a mate in one and playing correspondence and your opponent takes maximum time and a vacation and then let's time run out--this is not "cheating" but it is being an "fill in whatever"

At first I was going to point out this alleged Swedish rule is hogwash everywhere else, but apparently I'm rong agin...

FIDE "Laws of Chess" Article 7A states (I added italics)

During the game each player, having made his move on the chessboard, shall stop his own clock and start his opponent's clock. A player must always be allowed to stop his clock. His move is not considered to have been completed until he has done so, unless the made move ends the game. (See Articles 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 - except I can't find any 5.3 in the online FIDE Laws - NR) 

Article 5: The completion of the game

The clock is part of the game in competitive chess. Those who recommend you don't play blitz chess do not seem to recognise that a person can win on time in any standard time control (here, live chess).

JbSkaggs was right to say that getting your opponent to think too much is a skill. You should strive to make your opponent's day as difficult as possible by making each move a challenge!

If your opponent starts rushing his moves early in the game, you should be especially vigilant to make sure he's not missing something.

The clock is part of the game, learn to use it to your benefit!

I remember Roman Dzindzichashvili talking about "time sacrifices"* where you sacrifice material for time, so even winning on time involves skill.

If you use too much time you may get a better position, but you will have to play it very quickly. It's part of blitz.

*I believe this is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwjkMzhXkOk

He also says "[blitz] is all about the clock".

Something puzzled me several times in blitz games. Last time, I see my clock is running at appr. 30 seconds, whilst my opponent still has over 3 minutes. I text him "Why do you still have so much time left ?" His reply "You are taking too long per move". Does not seem fair, that the slower you move, the faster your clock runs. I know in real life it also happens, nothing much went on and you look in the mirror and you're 70 years old.

First of all make sure you're not playing with an incremental TL. As far as "the slower you move, the faster your clock runs" I presume you're being facetious?

I can definitely relate to your last sentence although I'm still a few (sigh) years short of 70 - so far.

I am sure most people do. I feel like that also so I try not to run out of time and play accurate! ( Quite tough ) Sometimes I just do.

Ok. Then yes, that is a good skill.

Why? You didn't make the move in time. Secondly, one would have to assume you were going to play the checkmating move, something your opponent deserves proof of (which he would never get because the game ended when you ran out of time). Just because you have a win doesn't mean you can take as long as you please to execute it. If you're about to lose on time, maybe you don't have time to check if your move is mate; you just have to play it abruptly.

Frankly, I'm somewhat disgusted that those are the rules in Sweden.

Now, if you mate before pressing the clock (you take your hand off the piece to make a move that's mate in 1), apparently it's a draw in America. This actually happened to me; I thought I was going to lose the game, but the TD told me it was actually a draw. That of course was to my benefit but I'm not sure it's actually fair (i.e., perhaps I deserved to lose).