Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chess.com vs. Lichess

siddhesh.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 221 posts

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#41

Post by perryprog »

dragontamer wrote: post #3

For chess analysis, I recommend SCID vs PC. It turns out that chess-playing programs have standardized upon UCI (Universal Chess Interface), meaning any chess-playing program, (IE: Stockfish and Leela Chess) can interface with any UCI program (in this case, SCID vs PC). SCID vs PC can then be tuned to whatever you think is appropriate for review. Add the tablebases if you want perfect endgame analysis, or favor faste…

There’s also chessx[1], which is what I’ve found myself to prefer (I’ve also never gotten SCID vs PC to run on macOS, unfortunately). It has some oddities, but once you get past that there’s a lot of great functionality to enjoy.

[1]: https://chessx.sourceforge.io

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#43

Post by tholman »

If you've been following these two products for the last few years it's definitely clear to see that Lichess is slowly eating chess.com's lunch ... They're not fast at development, but slowly and surely improving and innovating on the space via being open source.

For example, Lichess puzzles aren't quite of the same quality yet and their puzzle games are new (BUT) they've built and are improving the tech to create new puzzles from games played on their system which is ever increasing, with the benefit of being REAL positions reached in games.

It feels like when Lichess make a move (eg into puzzle games) its sudden and of high quality. ++ Their growth is amazing especially considering they aren't paying chess influencers to use their platform.

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#45

Post by thom »

dragontamer wrote: post #36
thom wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gotcha sorry, been a long time since I did this in chess and the last engine I wrote was for Hnefatafl where you’re using slightly bigger boards and I don’t remember there being a PEXT equivalent for bigger SSE stuff. Somehow convinced myself the lookup table generation was the only hard bit.

Yeah, PEXT only works on 64-bit numbers (and therefore, the 8x8 chess board / 64-bit "bitboard", with 1-bit per position). EDIT: Both PEXT and Magic Bitboards have a "Setup" phase that is run once. But there's also a separate phase that is run on every single position in the actual chess-board part.

Thanks for the refresher. You can tell I've abandoned these things half way through too many times! :)

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#46

Post by tzs »

It has been a few years since I looked at any of the major chess sites, but it used to be that chess.com had way more teaching and training material than lichess.

Where do they stand nowadays in that regard?

I also see that ChessCube.com is gone. Too bad. They had an interesting tournament format whose name I forget that was wild and fun. Instead of having a fixed number of games like normal tournaments, these ran for a fixed time. As soon as you finished a game you could go back into the pool to be paired for another game. So someone who is fast and good had a better chance of winning the tournament than someone who is good but not as fast, because they could play more games.

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#47

Post by albinofrenchy »

imgabe wrote: post #31

I also recently switched to Lichess after using Chess.com for years. What tipped it for me was that I switched to an iPhone, and for some reason the Chess.com app on the iPhone absolutely obliterated my battery. I'm not sure what the issue was and maybe it's been fixed, but for a while it was just eating up battery life while playing like nothing else. The servers for Lichess I find a little less reliable, but it's m…

The lichess app is all around better. Bullet is unplayable on chess.com's app.

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#48

Post by dvirsky »

One thing not mentioned here is the players. Chess.com is much more beginner heavy. I'm a pretty bad player, and while on lichess I'm slightly below the median, on chess.com I'm around 80th percentile. It also feels like the common or average playing style is a bit different, more basic and aggressive on chess.com. Here we go, another Fried Liver!

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#49

Post by e4e5 »

dvirsky wrote: post #39
willbw wrote: post #6

It seems pointless to discuss chess.com without mentioning the paid features like game analysis which are much more user-friendly than Lichess.

For one thing, framing your accuracy in percentage instead of the obscure "centipawn loss" makes understanding how well you played much easier. BTW I've compared their analysis on a number of games, and it seemed like lichess is much tougher on you in what it defines as a blunder.

I disagree, ACPL is a well defined system, while nobody really knows what the accuracy means or how it's defined.

1 CPL, in short, is the loss of 1/100th of a pawn. Take the average of that and you get ACPL. So a ACPL of 100 means that you on average lost one pawn on every move (of course this isn't literal) that you played.

Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess

#50

Post by e4e5 »

jfkw wrote: post #38

Glad to see Lichess mentioned here. I have been trying without success to log in or password reset using a Gmail account. Messages from Lichess never seem to be delivered to Gmail, even to the Spam folder. Short of creating a throwaway account to access the forums, is there any alternate way to contact Lichess admins to ask if this is a known issue?

You can go on the lichess discord, a lot of mods and admins are online there.
Post reply on HN