Newbies should check out r/anarchychess for tips
Be brave, be honest to yourself and stop this trush talkings!!!
Chess.com vs. Lichess
151–160 of 221 posts
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#152If you have some server sitting idle you could consider contributing cycles to the fishnet: https://lichess.org/get-fishnet
Neat. Is this vulnerable to abuse by submitting bad results back to the server, or have they figured out a low-cost way of verifying the integrity of the results somehow?
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not sure how you have a subscription to Lichess when it's a free site A subscription can just be an account - it doesn’t necessarily have to be a paid subscription.
That's weird, I've only ever used "subscription" as per this definition[0]: "A subscription is an amount of money that you pay regularly in order to belong to an organization, to help a charity or campaign, or to receive copies of a magazine or newspaper." [0] https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/subscri...
I get what you mean and I think the other guy was indeed misleading about this, but there really are lots of contexts where subscriptions are free. In the classic postal sense newsletters are mostly free (and yes, mostly spam), when a program "subscribes" for events from another program there isn't cost involved; and most importantly youtube channel subscriptions exist.
I also had the impression he implied paying for lichess, but technically the word subscription doesn't necessarily have that meaning in our current time any more.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#154I’ve written extensively on the rampant cheating happening on chess.com: https://travelhead.medium.com/rampant-cheating-on-chess-com-... LiChess on the other hand has incredible cheat detection algorithms, and I’ve only reported one cheater in the dozens of games I’ve played since quitting Chess.com and moving to Lichess. (I’m approximately 2350 on LiChess).
This is sad to see. I’ve played about 300 Rapid games on chess.com and there’s only one banned player in my game history. Am I just lucky?
I’m not good enough to instinctively suspect cheaters, and running post-game analysis on all of your games seems like a big time sink for little gained.
Another possible (dark pattern) solution would be an option to only play against other paying customers. I’d assume players who have paid would be less likely to risk losing their account. This would probably be a revenue boost for chess.com but might also upset free account holders.
Also, if chess.com shadow-banned accounts by only matching them against bots instead of real players maybe they’d be less likely to immediately create a new account.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean such behaviour is not uncommon on chess.com either. I've reported multiple people for game abandonment / abusive language / acting like jerks / taking super long to make moves in a game that's obviously been lost / etc. My inbox is on chess is full of such generic boilerplate messages from chess.com; I doubt they really kick anyone off their platform though (unless the player does something extreme): We've tak…
> taking super long to make moves in a game that's obviously been lost I'm a novice still (~1500), but at this level you can easily come back from a lost game. Opponents sometimes think that I'm stalling, but in reality I'm trying to make the best out of a lost position. My opinion is that if you go into a game with a certain time limit, the players have full right to use that time how they please. If you are in a hu…
I don't play that much chess, but:
If a player has 60 minutes for all their moves, then spend less then a minute for each move, until they are so far behind that in your mind, the game is over, now, they are spending 20 minutes on one move. And I have to still sit in front of the computer, because if I leave, they might make a move just before their timer runs out, hoping that I have already left the room, and now I will lose because it's my timer that runs out.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#156> Lichess is developed and managed mostly by one guy wow! is this realy true?!
Yes, he seems to be very happy to be building a cool project with a good community around it - https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/mpasyl/i_started_lic...
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#157I think it deserves a separate mention: lichess has so much better clock UI. Their clock is big and very clearly visible both on desktop and mobile. It also goes red when you are low on time. Chess.com's clock is tiny and I saw some GM complaining on his stream about losing on time because he was unable to track his clock because of that.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's weird, I've only ever used "subscription" as per this definition[0]: "A subscription is an amount of money that you pay regularly in order to belong to an organization, to help a charity or campaign, or to receive copies of a magazine or newspaper." [0] https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/subscri...
I get what you mean and I think the other guy was indeed misleading about this, but there really are lots of contexts where subscriptions are free. In the classic postal sense newsletters are mostly free (and yes, mostly spam), when a program "subscribes" for events from another program there isn't cost involved; and most importantly youtube channel subscriptions exist. I also had the impression he implied paying for…
[deleted]
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting perspective. I have subscriptions to both and my first reaction was the exact opposite of yours. Chess.con is so far ahead of lichens that it wasn’t debatable. What in your opinion leads you to believe that lichess is eating chess.com’s lunch. For me games are far easier and quicker to setup with chess.com. The drills are better at chess.com and so are the lessons, both in-depth and breadth. I can’t reall…
> I have subscriptions to both I'm not sure how you have a subscription to Lichess when it's a free site. Do you donate? > My Elo rank on lichess is a full 500 points higher on lichess than chess.com The ratings difference on lichess is arbitrary. Everyone starts higher (1500 vs 1200), so the average is higher. > For me games are far easier and quicker to setup with chess.com Unless I've missed something on chess.com…
> > I have subscriptions to both
> I'm not sure how you have a subscription to Lichess when it's a free site. Do you donate?
It's a sign they have actually not used Lichess, and just writing FUD.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#160Lichess is so much better. It's free. chess.com thinks its facebook and it looks really childish (they probably copied things from chesskid). They have like a billion developers (why? its chess.. and already done). Lichess is like 1 guy (who I think used to work for chesscom until the ceo was a dick or something)
haha no he never worked for chess.com, wonder where you heard that one :D
lichess is not one guy either, there's a whole community of developers, moderators etc.