Is the lack of any premove time penalty an exploitable flaw?!

The point is that bullet is simply a different game than classical or even blitz chess. KC should know better than myself that what matters in the time scramble is not the objective evaluation of the position, but who has the initiative. If I have mate in one with one second on the clock but my opponent has a couple checks he can throw in, then I lose. Unless of course I manage to avoid the checks by guessing premoves accurately, Hambleton style.

Thanks for removing my #46 comment. What was wrong with it? Me mentioning Morozevich's name :)) I was making a point, but hey - let's delete comments for nothing

OTB bullet chess also has a skill element that has little to do with chess. Quicker hand movements and eye-hand coordination is of great value.
A player with with quicker hand movements and eye-hand coordination will have a significant edge in OTB bullet chess.
Some cheeky players even perform confusing acts with pieces and the clock so they can win in time scrambles - I experienced that at the chess club.
Such cheeky chess players can win in the majority of the cases with a time deficit - contrary to the assertion of KC.

In my opinion, this eye-hand coordination is similar to mouse skills on the computer (influencing the premove feature).
It can be trained but has little to do with chess.

#54 Yeah, but try pre-moving in OTB chess.

#55 Premoves are part of internet chess, just like confusing acts for OTB chess.
The first point was about premoving requiring non-chess related skills in a similar way as time scrambles in real life chess.
The second point being that KC's assertion does not necessarily hold: "A time advantage of say 15 seconds in a bullet game, should generally statistically convert into a win, if you are trying your best to premove", because non-chess related skills will play a significant factor.

The main point in KC's argument is not the mouse skills or similar. It's the difference that your computer/internet set up makes. If there is a (seemingly) easy way to level the playing field in this regard, I really can't see why you wouldn't make use of it.

i think lag has always been a huge issue in all time critical computer games and even with perfect connection it will always be like that if you have players from all around the world, just because of natural physical limitations.
the only thing you can do here is maybe to even it out but that is extremely difficult.

and considiering how a few month ago it was on lichess the situation has EXTREMELY improved (where you couldnt even move), not sure if it is because of the new servers or changes in the code.
i have no idea but perhaps multiple or alternative premoves would improve the situation.

but from a chess perspectives player, i would just use increment.

i don't have anything if bullet tournaments change from 1+0 to 1+1. because it gives players from more distant locations a fairer game

People believe what they want to , its confirmation bias. End of the day , if you like a certain format you will play it. It is quite obvious (IMO) to the outside observer that Fischer random is an equalizer in chess ability (or some peoples idea of it) but so many players seem to avoid it because they have put hard work into openings and resultant middle game theory and enjoy the rewards of it . Cannot blame them. Hard work and skill are intimate but of course talent too.
If KC 's point is that ping is giving certain people advantage then this is not what I am writing against but if the point is that rules could be changed to help a certain type of skilled player win more then I stick with my previous points.

1 min + 1 s/move and no pre-moves would be an interesting tournament setup. (Although I probably still wouldn't play it).

@60 Genius idea
Even 1 +1 with the pre-move is a counter to many arguments against current format