Reaching 2400 Bullet on Lichess — and Beating a 3000+ Rated Player

Where My Ratings Stand Right Now

On Chess.com, my current ratings are:

• Bullet: 2300
• Blitz: 2100
• Rapid: 2000
• Daily: 1975

On Lichess, I recently crossed 2400 in bullet. That felt monumental. I honestly never thought I would get there. I had always floated around the 2200–2300 range and assumed that was roughly my ceiling. But the 2400 came, and now I am starting to think 2500 might actually be within reach.

A small but amusing "career goal" of mine has always been to have a 2000+ rating across all four time controls on Chess.com — rapid, blitz, bullet, and daily. I have three of the four. Daily chess is the hardest for me despite being the slowest format, because I play it much less frequently. I am currently rated 2000 in the global daily leaderboard on Chess.com, which places me in the top 0.1% of all daily players. That said, daily is the one I expect to take the longest to crack.

The Titled Players I Have Beaten Over the Years

Across 25 years of playing online I have managed to beat players of almost every FIDE title:

• CM — Candidate Master
• NM — National Master
• FM — FIDE Master
• IM — International Master
• GM — Grandmaster (once, in a bullet game on Playchess.com — still one of my most memorable wins)
• WFM — Women FIDE Master

The ones I have not yet beaten are WCM, WIM, and WGM. I am in no rush — these things happen organically when you play enough games. The GM win was a one-off in a bullet game and took me 20 years, so I am not holding my breath.

Fast Chess: Bullet, Ultra-Bullet, and Hyperbullet

I have always been drawn to fast chess. My favourite format is 1+0 bullet — one minute per side, no increment. Lately I have also been playing a lot of 30-second ultra-bullet games, and even some 15-second hyperbullet.

Hyperbullet is barely chess in the traditional sense. At 15 seconds per side, you are not calculating variations — you are moving on instinct, playing patterns, and trying to steal time from your opponent's clock by any means necessary. One of my favourite tactics at that speed is sacrificing a queen just to give check. Yes, you end up in a clearly losing position on the board, but if you manage to take a second off your opponent's clock in the chaos, it was worth it. It is a cheeky extra dimension of the game that I genuinely enjoy.

That said, 1+0 and 30-second are my bread and butter.

The Chess.com "Top Players in the World" Page

This is a funny side note. I recently Googled my own name and found that Chess.com has a page for me titled "Top Chess Players In The World." I had to laugh. I think Chess.com auto-generates these pages for anyone who has a FIDE profile, so it is not really a brag — but there it is, my name on a page that says "top chess players in the world." I'll take it.

The 3000+ Match: Four Games Against a Super-Rated Player

Now for the main event. A few days ago I was browsing the Lichess lobby when I saw someone rated 3000+ seeking a 1+0 unrated game. I said out loud, "wauw." A 3000-rated player in bullet is what you would call a super-GM level at that time control — even if they carry no official title. I immediately accepted.

Before the first game started I typed in the chat: "teach me sensei." He never replied.

Game 1: A Loss, but an Honest One

I resigned after 32 moves in a clearly lost position. Honestly, I was still in a bit of shock at having the opportunity to play a 3000-rated player, so my focus was not quite there. I made mistakes, got punished for them, and resigned. No shame in that.

Game 2: A Win — I Flagged Him with a Rook Up

This was the game that put me on cloud nine. After 65 moves I had a rook and two pawns against his lone king and one pawn — a completely won position. I flagged him with 2 seconds on the clock. I had not expected to win even one game. Winning this one already felt like more than I could have hoped for.

Game 3: He Opened with 1.h4 and 2.a4

He started with 1.h4 and 2.a4. Whether he was playing around or just not taking the match seriously after losing game 2, I am not sure. I tried to play normal chess, but ended up in a bad position early and lost after 42 moves. Fair enough.

Game 4: He Resigned — Final Score 2-2

The fourth game was chaotic — we both blundered, which at bullet speed is not unusual. But I had the better clock with 167 seconds ahead of him, and my position was winning. He resigned after 56 moves without seeing that I had also blundered. The final score: 2-2 against a 3000+ rated bullet player. I genuinely could not believe it.

What I Noticed: Avoiding Trades to Keep Things Complicated

One thing I immediately noticed during these games is that my opponent — like other high-rated players I have faced — actively avoided trading pieces. He kept as many pieces on the board as possible in order to keep the position complicated. This is something I consistently see when playing against stronger opponents.

In quick bullet games against players rated below 2200, trading pieces is common. Simplification happens naturally. But higher-rated players deliberately avoid it. They know that complexity is an advantage — more pieces means more tactical opportunities, more chances for the opponent to blunder under time pressure, and more ways to outplay you positionally. Considering this pattern, I think the fact that I managed to go 2-2 against him says something about how my own game is developing.

What's Next: Aiming for 2500

2400 already felt like something I might never reach. And then it came. Now, looking at what just happened against a 3000-rated player, I am starting to genuinely believe that 2500 is within reach. I know that is a long way from 2400 — each hundred points gets progressively harder — but belief matters in chess, and right now I have it.

I will keep playing, keep enjoying it, and see where the rating goes. That is the only plan I have ever had.