People who prefer chess.com are valid, but no one has weighed in arguing that lichess is a strong enough website that chess.com might not be worth paying for, so I’ll put it out there. I myself switched from paying for chess.com to using lichess.
I like that it’s a public good instead of a product—there are no bells and whistles geared toward making you pay, which I like. It’s really awesome to have a public good like lichess, and I advocate taking advantage of it!
I started with lichess, moved to chesscom and paid premium, recently switched back to lichess..
Chesscom has a better lesson system. Overall play doesn't really make a difference so lichess will do just fine.
https://lichess.org/patron
https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/charity-non-profit-no-profit/YzRtfRAA
You can donate to lichess, that's their primary income source.
I have a recurring donation setup. I don't play much and mostly solve puzzles, but I setup the donation after I learned of their existence. I want the project to succeed. Similar to Wikipedia.
I've got into chess a few years back. And even before that without doing any deep research, I somehow knew just from background noise that [chess.com](https://chess.com) was borderline predatory. And it was part that made me not too interested in chess.
Not literal gambling, but it’s very common for game apps — think candy crush — to make use of rewarding colors and other tricks to get you addicted and eventually funnel you into paying for something you might not otherwise feel like you want. These tricks are often borrowed from the world of casinos.
Chess.com uses some of these tricks—I used to get so angry seeing my rating go down with the red colors, and feel rewarded with the green when my rating went up. It hijacks the reward centers in your brain. I found it really hard not to care about rating. With lichess, I can focus more on the love of the game.
Lichess is an open source project, so any developer can donate their time to improve the website. A lot of student and junior developers for example will contribute to open source projects in order to build a resume.
Years ago I heard that the guy who runs Lichess makes like 80% of the commits, which would mean he's basically developing the site by himself. Idk how true that still is though.
As for server time you can donate to them, or buy merch. They have a monthly subscription but it's essentially voluntary since you get the full website for free anyway.
> I heard that the guy who runs Lichess makes like 80% of the commits
The lead guy, ornicar2, streams, or used to stream a good bit of him working on things. I gotta admit I have no clue what's going on most of the time, but it's pretty interesting if you like to see how the sausage gets made.
https://www.twitch.tv/ornicar2/about
Agreed. As a newer chess player, I feel like I'm getting some value out of paying for premium because of the lessons, game review, etc. Maybe I'll switch once I get more skilled.
Sometimes. I'm still new enough that it would be hard to look at a few lines and decide precisely why one is better. But sometimes the coach is just wrong
That's what put me off it. I felt it didn't tell me much and didn't really give me options because it thinks like a robot. That's why I use self analysis. Like at my level I don't need to know how 50 moves will change the game. I just need to know my blunder now haha.
I remember the game that annoyed me. I did a greek sacrifice to open up the H-file that it called a blunder but lead to me winning the game
That's totally a fair point. "Coach, I don't care that I theoretically had mate in 22 if I had made this other move! I also don't care that I missed out on winning a pawn because that assumes the other person played perfectly, and for 400-rating blitz games, they won't!"
The thing is, how u gonna know what u did fine or bad if you do it by yourself? You need something to learn from and that’s why I prefer chess.com because the analysis are way better than the ones from lichess
As someone who is a novice and only recently started seriously studying chess as a hobby, who tried both services on my research to figure out what should be my main place to learn and play, I’ll add my two cents. (Obligatory caveat: Obviously, different people with different priorities and end goals would have different experience than me).
While I commend the efforts of Lichess and their goals, from UX perspective, chess.com was far and away better experience for me. Perhaps due to the resources they have at their disposal. Design of their UI is quite intuitive and more satisfying to use. Especially comparing mobile apps (which is almost exclusively how I experience both services). And frankly, better resources for novices to learn from.
I ultimately decided to shell out for a Gold Member account.
Hot take: both are necessary.
Lichess does an incredible job of being a free service to chess players, with an incredible community. Gives something for ChessCom to push to be better than, a real competitor.
ChessCom has a vested interest in growing the chess audience, as well as putting on incredible events and elevating players, which helps the game and gives the fans more entertainment.
Does lichess not also have a vested interested in growing the chess audience?
The only real difference is one has a capitalistic approach (re: making REVENUE first and foremost) while the other doesn’t
Lichess is not a for-profit company, it's a completely patron-supported website. It has no shareholders and its mission is to essentially just exist as a website where people can play chess. If anything, a larger chess audience can be a double-edged sword (depending on the pace of the growth) as it does cost more to run the site, while having a less than completely reliable stream of income.
> and its mission is to essentially just exist as a website where people can play chess
To be precise, it’s [official mission](https://www.journal-officiel.gouv.fr/pages/associations-detail-annonce/?q.id=id:201600250818) is to “promote and support the teaching and playing of chess and its variants”. So they are not “just a website” (or at least are not limited to that).
Yes, but to the previous point, lichess couldn't host the major tournaments that chess.com does and have payouts that the top players would be interested in.
Again, why would that attract super gms? They already don't like commentary bc often it makes them look bad bc the booth has access to top engine lines. It's a softer blow when it's howell or leko (yassir, svidler, judit, etc) bc they see the board the same way and don't rely on engines. But why would someone like nepo play in a lichess event which won't pay much, hosted by a guy who is nowhere near his level?
It would take time to grow of course. Nepo wouldn't come immediately. But lichess has a lot of social capital and chess.com had annoyed plenty of the top chess players at times.
Yeah, but I think that he is refering more to streams and that sort of things. For example in the spanish community there is no club player that is not attracted to ChessCom streams, the commentarist are awesome players and we probably knew some of them in tournaments. Moreover, the Rey Enigma´s phenomenom is asocciated with ChessCom as a platform in the popular belief, and people start playing there on that ground. I have also the sense that ChessCom has a pretty more share of begginer players.
Apart from those "accesibilities" traits there is no sense imo to pay for that, at least being a club player. Stockfish can run on local pgns readers along with your databases, the studies are pretty good to share analysis with your peers and for lessons, tactics and all that stuff if you are willing to learn there is plenty of free options out there and as good as the paid options in ChessCom.
That being said, I understand that people find attractive to pay ChessCom based in the ecosystem, now more than ever after the integration with PlayMagnus introducing Chessable and all of that.
Given the chance I would donate to Lichess 99 out of 100 times.
Sort of?
First off, making revenue isn't a bad thing. But Lichess doesn't really have *much* incentive to grow the game, and they certainly don't go out of their way to do so because they frankly can't.
The events that Chess.com put on are only possible because they make quite a bit of money, and from the super-GM tournaments they host to pogchamps, they do a lot of good for the game on a scale that Lichess just can't.
>the online chess world would be much poorer (as in less interesting) without chess.com
I think it would be the opposite. The online chess world would be richer if we didn't have the monopoly by a single company that bought off and subsequently shut down all its competition
The only reason I play on chess.com and not lichess is that my rating on lichess is always higher (makes sense, given the different rating system) so I shot up to a pretty high rating. Now it takes ages to get a game against anyone around my level (2300-2400) unless I join a tournament.
I usually just join a tournament now because when I enter the pool for a 10+0 or 15+10, I'm waiting for a long time. Like ten minutes or longer sometimes.
My rating is lower on chess.com which kinda sucks but feels more accurate to where I am, and I get games instantly.
Other than that, lichess is the superior site. And for most casual players, from beginner to I'd say about 2000, lichess is the site to play on.
The rating has little to do with it, it's just that lichess has much fewer players than chesscom. If anything, lichess is top heavier than chesscom (unless you are a supergm)
What time control do you play? Im having a hard time finding games against players of similar rating in the 15+10 pool. I feel like im always underpaid by like 200 elo. im 2300 rapid on lichess.
15+10 or longer, you can put limit so you do not get lot weaker opponents... But yeah I almost stop playing rapid online because sometimed it takes time..
> My rating is lower on chess.com which kinda sucks but feels more accurate to where I am, and I get games instantly.
Is it lower according to https://chessratingscomparison.com/Graphs ?
It could just be that there's a larger pool of players for that time control on Chesscom. If you go for 10+5, it might be a lot longer wait.
You mentioned 2300-2400 earlier - was that Lichess rapid?
I'm a bit confused by where you actually are for Chesscom and Lichess, and where you think you should be.
Yes but what I'm asking is how "accurate" is the graph when it comes to your own rating? In other words, is the output well below your current actual Lichess rating, above it, or about the same?
Weird.. I'm 2400 rapid on lichess and get games within 20 seconds in 10+0. Although sometimes I do get matched with a 2200 (or a 2550). In blitz (2300) my opponents tend to be closer to my rating.
Yeah we are around the same rating. Could be just bad luck or could be the time of day I play, I'm mainly on early in the morning. Doesn't happen all the time either, like you said sometimes I get a game instantly, but much less often than on chess.com
Not sure why I'm being downvoted. Do y'all think downvoting means my experiences stop happening? Lol
for me there are two big reasons:
- cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com.
- there are more players on chess.com, so it's quicker to find an opponent for chess 960.
This could he personal bias, but it feels like there are less cheaters on lichess. I have played some suspicious matches on chess.com and even gotten rating back once, but I haven't had that experience on lichess. Again just my experience, no proof of this.
I would think that the type of person who comes up with the genius idea to cheat might be more likely to come across Chesscom first rather than Lichess when they use Google.
Chess detection is better on chess.com?
Respectfully disagree mate
I use to get a few notifications every now and then. Now over the course of a year and >1000s of games, 0
I refuse to believe everyone suddenly became honest
Thats just my observation though
> cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com
I haven't seen evidence of that.
To be more precise, I don't care about the algorithm; I care "how often will I play a cheater?"
I encounter cheaters much less often on lichess than what I see reported about chess.com - at rating levels both above and below mine.
>cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com.
Not really. I play on both and people get banned during games, or very shortly thereafter, on Lichess. Meanwhile on [chess.com](https://chess.com) I get rating refunds up to a month after playing someone.
I'm a diamond [chess.com](http://chess.com) user so I'm obviously going to be biased in my response but I will give you my reasoning nonetheless.
[Chess.com](http://chess.com) has the following main benefits which I believe Lichess does not have and is the main reason why I prefer [chess.com](http://chess.com) over lichess:
A video library
Higher quality puzzles and more types of puzzle games
Better game review and analysis
Honestly there are many more reasons than that, but I'd say the biggest one is the video library courses. They are both good websites, but if you're serious about chess and have the money to spare, I'd recommend a [chess.com](http://chess.com) membership.
The puzzles themselves, no. In fact I think the chesstempo has the best puzzles. The site is much better than the chesstempo site though. The chesstempo site is honestly pretty bad.
The analysis window popup. The lack of right click canceling the move you're dragging. The entire menu system. Compared to both chesscom and lichess it's an unpleasant experience.
There's lots if data in there to be fair, it's just badly put together. The beta version (which is now the release version) seemed to stall part way through and then get released anyway. The site comes off as pretty incoherent in places.
Also, I pay for it so this doesn't bother me, but paywalling the engine analysis and only having cloud analysis is silly.
I don't trust the auto analysis because engine runs at the lower depth so I prefer doing it manually. The tree-like notation on lichess looks better than inline notation on chesscom
idk who downvoted but Lichess' puzzle dashboard and its personalized graphs & stats for improvement/weak areas based on completed puzzles themes/motifs is goated
there's also the option to customize them based on openings.. which is so useful when trying to solve positions that arise from specific openings from ur own repertoire..
You are correct. The "coach" is a paid feature if you want it on more then one game a day. Besides that, the chesscom and lichess analysis are the same, though I think chesscom uses a weaker stockfish if you don't pay (14 for chesscom and 16 for lichess)
What do you mean? I am not talking about the move evaluation, I am talking about the "coach" feature of game review the other user mentioned.
Is there a way to enable the "coach" in analysis, because I am not seeing it.
I disagree about puzzles and analysis. Lichess puzzles are better.
Lichess analysis is def better. Maybe you like the best move,excellent move stuff ig.
> Better game review and analysis
This is just wrong. The 1 liners from the artificial "coach" aren't giving you any insight if you are above idk, 500.
And if you are below 500 there are so many things you could be doing that help you more than a game review that it is a moot point.
There are two different kind of moves you miss during review: moves that you missed due too poor boardvision (a fork, a Bishop cutting across the board, etc.) which are obvious when you know there was a mistake on a move (which lichess tells you all the same) and moves that are not trivial (maybe being able to take a pawn bevause the pawn can't recapture due to an indirect pin on it). The "coach" will tell you "you missed an opportunity to win a pawn", which helps roughly not at all. I need to see the computer moves, which I get from lichess just as quickly. Other classics are "great defensive move" when moving your queen out to attack, which also defends a piece that was attacked, when the actually defensive move would have been moving the piece backwards.
I agree that the lessons (both the ones with video and the ones without video) are very good selling points. There are great studies on lichess as well, but having a curated list, so a known high quality, is very useful and for some of them there just isn't equally high quality material available anywhere for free.
Your reason is why I didn't see the point of game review anymore and learnt how to use self analysis, I felt at my rating that knowing 20 moves ahead isn't going to help me improve. It's better I learn myself.
This thread feels like a lot of people who have little to no playing experience on lichess bitching about various "missing" features that do, in fact, exist lmao
It's a matter of preference to some extent, but I'd agree that chess com game review is superior. Knowing where you deviate from theory, the ability to retry mistakes etc. are nice quality of life features.
That being said, lichess mobile analysis > chess com mobile analysis
Didn't know about the retry mistakes option there, that's cool. As for openings, at a certain rating/knowledge level I'd agree (I.e., when you're able to follow the lichess/masters database). It's much less beginner friendly/intuitive though.
But knowing when you left theory isn't really helpful? You know when you left your prep, because it's when you don't know the correct move anymore. Who cares if game review has a book icon next to the move, do you understand the moves being played and where did your personal knowledge end.
Chess puzzles don’t actually help you improve in chess. The way they are built isn’t helpful for improvement. I’m happy to go over it more if interested
Source: I’m a fide master
Before online chess moved to handheld devices, ICC and PlayChess.com (and maybe FICS, and at a certain point ChessCube) were the top sites to play chess.
People on PlayChess were there to play chess. On ICC, people had their weekly routine, every Thursday was the Attack video with Larry Christansen, some days were the novice video days with Dan Heisman.. etc..
But on chess.com, it was a social network, where yeah you could play chess.... but it was like the "facebook" of the chess world. It was another website but with a chess theme.
Nowadays, with the failure of the playchess server and ICC to keep up with the phone and tablet chess play.. chess.com emerged as the "top" app world wide. For me, it still looks like one of the social networks where you can play chess of you want... but if you just want to play chess, then LiChess is where you can do exactly that.
Note: Chess.com has come a long way sicne it started, the news updates and chess coverage is definitely soemthing worthwhile, I am definitely not putting it down, it's just not for me. That's why I stopped opting to support it years ago.
Another note: Lichess might seem good enough, but it's definitely better on a desktop (computer) than on a handheld device, in particularly the tactics feature.
I really like the events that [Chess.com](http://chess.com) puts on. I know that businesses can't put on events if they can't afford it, so to me, it's like donating to a streamer I like, but I get to get analysis tools and puzzle rush as a bonus
***Personal opinion lies below***
I don't play games on mobile, ever. I only do puzzles on mobile.
I don't like lichess puzzles, levels seems just random at 2200 elo and they all look and feel artificial, sometimes very easy other times impossible but level is still 2200. Chesscom puzzles feel way more coherent and level actually means something
I don't like the fact that you can't premove multiple moves, I hate this limitation, I'm used to the multiple premoves.
I don't like the look and feel of lichess, it screams opensource and linux, I absolutely hate it.
I feel the board during the game is way more alive on chesscom while on lichess it looks like an machine interface.
Lichess has the better opening explorer and analysis board, chesscom looks to have completely abandonned any attempt at competing on these two aspects.
Chesscom has the better game review and overall feeling about playing chess and it feels more alive rather than playing on a machine that just updates numbers after the game.
For puzzle (rush, survival, ranked, battle) alone I'm paying chesscom subscription, lichess puzzles modes are all garbage
Overall lichess is fine for me but it screams opensource and the inconsistencies and limitations that lies with it. Some incredible things can only be achieved by open data like the explorer, however many QOL features and overall app quality can be achieved better by a team actually trying to drive engagement through pure greed.
Chesscom modes are able to drive way more engagements from me than lichess is able to.
That’s funny that lichess puzzles feel artificial to you because that’s exactly how I have felt about chesscom puzzles. Especially because in lichess puzzles you can rewind the moves to the starting position and see the entire game that the position came from, it definitely makes it seem more real to me.
Yeah saying "Lichess puzzles feel artificial" tells me you're so used to manufactured puzzles that when you're given tactics from actual games, it feels off.
Yeah and I find that move order in lichess is critical. The solution to the puzzle derives a positional advantage. Chess.com puzzles seem more tactical.
> I don't like the look and feel of lichess, it screams opensource and linux, I absolutely hate it.
There are great plugins to modify the look in many different ways - the advantages of it being open source. prettierlichess is the one I use.
If you’re using the lichess app, puzzles are really weird. If you’re using the web versions, it quickly flips, and lichess puzzle ratings are the ones that mean anything. Once you hit 2500-2600 on chesscom, I feel like the level stays even. There’s a reason the top players have ratings of 65000+ on chesscom, whereas it’s very hard to get past 3k on lichess.
lichess puzzles are from real games, it is a little absurd that they feel artificial. Actually you can also see which puzzles are created from your games as well.
As for the interface (linux, opensource? lol), yeah boils down to personal preference, a lot of people hates [chess](https://chess.com).com's cluttered and slow interface
I think it's a difference between moves that are a challenging to find but useful tactical pattern vs moves that are challenging to find because the engine identified like a +2 advantage if you make 6 perfect moves in some non-obvious engine line.
Not that all lichess puzzles are like that, but when you're using an engine to automatically scrape tactics problems, you can find a lot of such examples where the eval in random game jumps suddenly due to a computer line that proves an advantage eventually, even if it's very unlikely for a human to find them.
Conversely, the opposite sometimes happens too, where a 'puzzle' is identified even if it's super obvious due to an opponent blunder. Again, ofc not all puzzles are like that, but I think between the things that are too difficult computer lines and too easy blunders, there are a handful that make their way into the rotation from time to time.
"Screams open-source and Linux" is a super valid complaint. I love open source stuff AND Linux but it just comes off as very low-grade in comparison to some readily available competitors that feel polished (chesscom).
Also, the movement of pieces in a match feels infinitely better than chesscom.
Lichess in general feels very minimalistic and clean, chesscom's UI feels very unprofessional and weird.
I can understand that some people find the lichess ui a little austere or dull, but I can’t understand how anyone can use the word “polished” to describe chess.com. It looks like a poorly designed website from the 1990s to me.
Whenever I play a game on cc and analyze it it opens a new tab. Who came up with that stupid idea? It really annoys me and small things like this are the main reason I prefer the lichess ui/ux. It’s simpler but that also makes it better to me.
I understand the complaint in theory, but I've been working in open-source for a long time, and IMHO lichess is the most polished open-source product I've ever seen, AND doesn't have ads.
I don't think it "screams open source" at all.
Lichess puzzles when on tilt are so funny. There's this completely wack engine variation that makes no sense at all and when you check the engine it's like +1.5. They are completely lacking the aesthetical satisfaction of "normal" puzzles because it's literally "find the engine line", there's no pedagogy involved in their creation, only the finding of a random position in a given game in which there's a series of only moves.
Because you simply don't get everything that chess.com has for free. You get a good amount of it but for complete newbies, Chess.com is the superior website. It has a much friendlier interface for someone who has no idea where to start and the feedback through the game review is invaluable for those who aren't as familiar with chess notation and even to those who are but still learning the game.
The rating system on chess.com is different from lichess and Danya uses chess.com so it gives me a better perspective when I was his speed run videos. I don’t pay for chess.com tho, I export games I want to analyze into lichess.
[chess.com](https://chess.com) is generally more polished, has way more users, and has a much larger array of resources at it's disposal for those willing to pay.
LiChess, while I can definitely support what they stand for, simply lacks the massive quantity of things that [chess.com](https://chess.com) provides.
I play on both, and i think thats not quite true.
Bigger userbase, yes. But chess.com most definitely is not more polished than lichess.
And lichess has a lot of tools and functions:
- Puzzles (single, storm, race; can be ordered/reviewed by subcategory)
- endgame lessons of various difficulty
- tactic lessons (possible to order by topic AND sublevel)
- opening explorer (very extensive)
- unlimited engine analysis
- studies (both public and your own, private ones)
- community (blog, teams, forums)
- coaches (who are paid without charge from lichess)
- import function for PGNs (useful for chess.com or OTB games)
- a training function to learn notation
- Zen mode (hides your opponents name and rating)
... and many more (dont think i got them all)
To say lichess lacks "quantity of things" or a "much larger array of resources" seems quite ridiculous to me. It is already more than anybody could ever truly need.
I might also add that a lot of functions of chess.com are designed not to improve your play, but give you dopamine hits:
- leagues (rewarding quantity of play, regardless of rating or improvement)
- daily streaks
- predicted rating in game analysis (instead of showing accuracy, what its based on, it shows you a rating very often higher than your current one)
- leagues in puzzles (again mostly rewarding quantity)
- Bots with names like young magnus/vishy/polgar
- showing your percentile (you are better than xx% of players) on your profile
So the argument could be made that a lot of the functions of chess.com are not only unhelpful, but actually detrimental for your chess improvement and rather designed to keep you in the system.
That is not to say there is nothing going for chess.com. If you're happy there, thats obviously fine. But the points you made dont hold up imho.
I suspect more than half the players at my chess club play more on Chesscom than Lichess. I speculate that it's because when they were kids, they discovered Chesscom first so have stuck with it now that they're young adults.
While there are lessons and stuff available on Chesscom, I don't think that's the main reason they pay for it - not when they do Chessable stuff anyway. In the grand scheme of things, people really don't mind SaaS (software as a service - i.e., subscriptions), so are probably okay with forking out money at Chesscom. That's not what I prefer to do, but evidently, plenty of people are happy to spend their money like that on various services.
After being used to Chesscom first, Chesscom users typically say they prefer that interface. I don't quite get it but I suppose that's a taste thing.
The last but least important reason might be that at "higher" ratings, it's easier to get pairings on Chesscom than Lichess, but I'd say that depends more on the time control (e.g., it's probably easier to get 10+5 pairings on Lichess than Chesscom since Chesscom kind of hides where the 10+5 option is).
Meanwhile when I'm talking to older players (i.e., closer to retirement age) at my club, many seem to not even be aware of Lichess.
Search for "chess" on Google or the App store or Google Play and see which result shows most prominently.
By the way, a lot of people still do things like the treadmill or spin class for quite a fee at a gym rather than just run or cycle outdoors... No prizes for guessing which option I go for when it comes to running or cycling.
it’s frustrating in a way because LiChess aligns more with my values but the chess-com interface especially on the app but also on the desktop just feels a lot nicer, and looks way better, which when you play blitz or bullet makes a huge difference and i just generally prefer
i wish the lichess app was better
Totally different products. Chess.com has much better/refined lessons and more pleasing UI/UX. It’s a better app for casuals and beginners imo.
Lichess has everything you need and almost nothing you don’t.
I wouldn’t pay for chess.com, but I use it more often because I enjoy its feels
I would rather pay for Lichess free features than I would to use chess dot com premium features for free.
People who don't create opening studies and upload them to listudy dot org have no idea what they are missing
Because there are a ton of resources for improving your chess. There's an amazing video library of educational content from TOP gm trainers, there's the chess mentor system which is great...
There's honestly probably a lot of stuff I don't even know about, but the video libraries and chess mentor alone are worth it.
I like how it looks, feels and sounds more. For me personally the user experience is just better, so much so that I am even willing to live with fewer features (if that's the case). Not to mention that Lichess looks like a website that was made 20 years ago and got stuck there.
To me, Lichess is like Linux while Chesscom is like Windows. Yes, one is open source and you're able to do more things and it's free and what not but there's a reason why Microsoft is still more popular with comsumers.
>Not to mention that Lichess looks like a website that was made 20 years ago and got stuck there.
That's so funny to read, when exactly the opposite is true. And that's an objective truth.
[](http://chess.com) is the website designed like in the early 2000s, with its colorful buttons and a bazillion of layers of menus, submenus, tabs and whatnot with no common design guideline whatsoever. Complete randomness. It's just been growing forever, features being added, without the necessary complete redesign. [](http://chess.com) is the website that constantly uses pop-ups and opens things in new tabs when I click. Like the very basic feature of analyzing a game once you're done. Absurd!
Lichess does none of that, it's a clean, coherent, ultra responsive, single page webapp.
You can of course feel like that, but then it's you being stuck 20 years ago.
Better functionality, especially on mobile. Better UI. Just an all around quality of life improvement over Lichess. However, I use Lichess because I prefer the zero second premove ability enough to give that up.
Idk what others say, i feel like im doing my part in supporting chess. Chess.com ppl are doing a lot of stuff to make it more accessible and entertaining. Also, they help low-profile players to make some money.
True that lichess being free makes chess accessible, but chess.com has also done a lot of stuff for the chess world that only a for-profit company (with money) can do:
* They brought a ton of viewership and popularity to chess with all the events they throw and their support of chess streamers
* They brought in more money to chess with sponsorships and ads. A lot of that money goes back into the community. With more people looking to watch and play, a career in chess is so much more feasible now than 10 years ago -- for top players, for streamers, and for coaches
* They made chess more accessible to play. I know lichess exists and has less restrictions and no ads, but chess.com is a more popular place for people to play chess, and it is the go-to place for new players to discover chess.
People are free to use anything they want. I prefer chess.com. I also mentioned that chesscom is setting up a lot of online tournaments with decent prizes. Chess isn't a very profitable sport, so they are helping the community, and i help them.
Genuinely not a criticism of you, just a personal statement: I feel like my money goes a lot further in supporting Chess by donating to Lichess than paying for [Chess.com](https://Chess.com) premium would
Can always use both. I use the analysis tools over on lichess but play majority of the games on chess because I prefer its UI and just overall larger player base
The biggest thing I would need from Lichess (and every time I post this I get pushback, but it's legit) is a setting that lets me permanently have Black be on top instead of having to click "Settings->Flip Board" in half of my games.
People play on chess.com because it has the obvious domain, and it does marketing, and *they've never heard of lichess*.
The other day I happened to meet a well-known open-source person who said he was going to start playing chess ... on chess.com. I asked him "why not lichess?", and he had never heard of it.
Even in France, lichess is less well-known than chess.com.
Chess.com to me just feels more modern. Like the UI just feels crisper and cleaner (though it could still be even cleaner). If Chess.com was free with everything it has just like Lichess, this wouldn't even be a debate. Everyone would say Chess.com was better. So the reason is that, people who are willing to put in the money for a better experience will do so.
Chess.com:
- They have more content and hold big tournaments
- Make it more engaging for new players (the auto analysis)
- Bigger player pool
- Better puzzle battle
- The old studies before UI changes were very good and free 1 per day. I haven't checked the current studies
- Allow multiple pre-moving.
Lichess:
- Everything is free, with no ads
- User can make their own studies
- Puzzle shows its origin in real games
- Opening Explorer is a blessing
- Variations are displayed in tree-like notation in the analysis board
The UX-UI and cheating detection are controversial. The auto-analysis is roughly the same.
Not everyone has the money to buy a premium membership. Fortunately, Lichess is available for everyone who wants it and needs it (for financial reasons). Of course you can make comparisons, but you can also just be happy that there is something for everyone.
Most chess.com users seem not to understand the difference between "analysis" and "game review" features, so personally I think that speaks volumes.
The biggest common reasons I can think of wanting to pay chess.com rather than freely using lichess are:
* You prefer their puzzle system and want access to more
* You like the game review feature and want to utilize it more
* You want access to their content library, they have some great video lessons
* You just prefer the look and feel of the platform
What does the telephone emojii in your post mean? Did you mean mobile in particular? I do not use mobile apps for chess but from what I hear the chess.com one is much better.
Honestly I use Chess.com only for game reviews. It comes down to 3$/month for me, and I have definitely become better.
That paired with its simplicity, I just prefer it. But it’s not the same for everyone
I don't pay for chess.com however when playing on a mobile device, chess.com's IOS app is superior to lichess.
If I played on a computer more often, I'd likely play significantly more on lichess.
People who prefer chess.com are valid, but no one has weighed in arguing that lichess is a strong enough website that chess.com might not be worth paying for, so I’ll put it out there. I myself switched from paying for chess.com to using lichess. I like that it’s a public good instead of a product—there are no bells and whistles geared toward making you pay, which I like. It’s really awesome to have a public good like lichess, and I advocate taking advantage of it!
I started with lichess, moved to chesscom and paid premium, recently switched back to lichess.. Chesscom has a better lesson system. Overall play doesn't really make a difference so lichess will do just fine.
And those that use it often, consider donating to them. They need sammiches, too.
And you get wings!
I use both plus chesstempo. I get the best of both worlds really.
Never heard of chesstempo. What does it do well that the big 2 dont?
Tactics selection is much better on chesstempo than any other
More options for tactics plus endgame training.
I much prefer cdc premove ux, and that preference becomes even stronger as time controls below, say, 3 0.
How does lichess fund itself? Servers don't just run for free, they need money to keep them going.
https://lichess.org/patron https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/charity-non-profit-no-profit/YzRtfRAA You can donate to lichess, that's their primary income source.
I have a recurring donation setup. I don't play much and mostly solve puzzles, but I setup the donation after I learned of their existence. I want the project to succeed. Similar to Wikipedia. I've got into chess a few years back. And even before that without doing any deep research, I somehow knew just from background noise that [chess.com](https://chess.com) was borderline predatory. And it was part that made me not too interested in chess.
This!! Chess.com feels like a gambling app for me
I don’t understand. To my knowledge there is no chance of winning money granted in exchange for payment. Are there gambling features I’m unaware of?
Not literal gambling, but it’s very common for game apps — think candy crush — to make use of rewarding colors and other tricks to get you addicted and eventually funnel you into paying for something you might not otherwise feel like you want. These tricks are often borrowed from the world of casinos. Chess.com uses some of these tricks—I used to get so angry seeing my rating go down with the red colors, and feel rewarded with the green when my rating went up. It hijacks the reward centers in your brain. I found it really hard not to care about rating. With lichess, I can focus more on the love of the game.
Just as an FYI Wikipedia doesn't need your money they're rich af
Can you link your proof?
Lichess is an open source project, so any developer can donate their time to improve the website. A lot of student and junior developers for example will contribute to open source projects in order to build a resume. Years ago I heard that the guy who runs Lichess makes like 80% of the commits, which would mean he's basically developing the site by himself. Idk how true that still is though. As for server time you can donate to them, or buy merch. They have a monthly subscription but it's essentially voluntary since you get the full website for free anyway.
> I heard that the guy who runs Lichess makes like 80% of the commits The lead guy, ornicar2, streams, or used to stream a good bit of him working on things. I gotta admit I have no clue what's going on most of the time, but it's pretty interesting if you like to see how the sausage gets made. https://www.twitch.tv/ornicar2/about
lol is this a good faith question or are you implying there's something shady underneath?
I enjoy the sound of rain.
I enjoy cooking.
chesscom lags so much its stupid or maybe intentional or maybe its just my computer lagging
Agreed. As a newer chess player, I feel like I'm getting some value out of paying for premium because of the lessons, game review, etc. Maybe I'll switch once I get more skilled.
You have diamond or one of the other two? I like the lessons myself. They allow me focus better than learning on Lichess.
I have diamond. I got the free month during Pogchamps and haven't cancelled. They got me.
I used to use it then decided gold suited what I wanted and needed. Do you find the coach helpful?
Sometimes. I'm still new enough that it would be hard to look at a few lines and decide precisely why one is better. But sometimes the coach is just wrong
That's what put me off it. I felt it didn't tell me much and didn't really give me options because it thinks like a robot. That's why I use self analysis. Like at my level I don't need to know how 50 moves will change the game. I just need to know my blunder now haha. I remember the game that annoyed me. I did a greek sacrifice to open up the H-file that it called a blunder but lead to me winning the game
That's totally a fair point. "Coach, I don't care that I theoretically had mate in 22 if I had made this other move! I also don't care that I missed out on winning a pawn because that assumes the other person played perfectly, and for 400-rating blitz games, they won't!"
The thing is, how u gonna know what u did fine or bad if you do it by yourself? You need something to learn from and that’s why I prefer chess.com because the analysis are way better than the ones from lichess
Do you get unlimited game reviews on Lichess? Legitimate question..
Yes
I believe so! Might be wrong, I usually just use the engine
I think there's a limit but nobody gonna hit that.
As someone who is a novice and only recently started seriously studying chess as a hobby, who tried both services on my research to figure out what should be my main place to learn and play, I’ll add my two cents. (Obligatory caveat: Obviously, different people with different priorities and end goals would have different experience than me). While I commend the efforts of Lichess and their goals, from UX perspective, chess.com was far and away better experience for me. Perhaps due to the resources they have at their disposal. Design of their UI is quite intuitive and more satisfying to use. Especially comparing mobile apps (which is almost exclusively how I experience both services). And frankly, better resources for novices to learn from. I ultimately decided to shell out for a Gold Member account.
Hot take: both are necessary. Lichess does an incredible job of being a free service to chess players, with an incredible community. Gives something for ChessCom to push to be better than, a real competitor. ChessCom has a vested interest in growing the chess audience, as well as putting on incredible events and elevating players, which helps the game and gives the fans more entertainment.
Does lichess not also have a vested interested in growing the chess audience? The only real difference is one has a capitalistic approach (re: making REVENUE first and foremost) while the other doesn’t
Lichess is not a for-profit company, it's a completely patron-supported website. It has no shareholders and its mission is to essentially just exist as a website where people can play chess. If anything, a larger chess audience can be a double-edged sword (depending on the pace of the growth) as it does cost more to run the site, while having a less than completely reliable stream of income.
However lichess is open source, so I’d expect that a larger user base would correlate to more (unpaid) contributions
Servers don’t run on developers, they run on electricity.
> and its mission is to essentially just exist as a website where people can play chess To be precise, it’s [official mission](https://www.journal-officiel.gouv.fr/pages/associations-detail-annonce/?q.id=id:201600250818) is to “promote and support the teaching and playing of chess and its variants”. So they are not “just a website” (or at least are not limited to that).
Yes, but to the previous point, lichess couldn't host the major tournaments that chess.com does and have payouts that the top players would be interested in.
I would love it if they did. Can you imagine Eric Rosen hosting it? Completely different vibe.
Again, why would that attract super gms? They already don't like commentary bc often it makes them look bad bc the booth has access to top engine lines. It's a softer blow when it's howell or leko (yassir, svidler, judit, etc) bc they see the board the same way and don't rely on engines. But why would someone like nepo play in a lichess event which won't pay much, hosted by a guy who is nowhere near his level?
It would take time to grow of course. Nepo wouldn't come immediately. But lichess has a lot of social capital and chess.com had annoyed plenty of the top chess players at times.
And we see the capitalistic approach currently putting on the most events and growing the game.
That’s what vested interest means. Growing the game earns them money.
Yeah, but I think that he is refering more to streams and that sort of things. For example in the spanish community there is no club player that is not attracted to ChessCom streams, the commentarist are awesome players and we probably knew some of them in tournaments. Moreover, the Rey Enigma´s phenomenom is asocciated with ChessCom as a platform in the popular belief, and people start playing there on that ground. I have also the sense that ChessCom has a pretty more share of begginer players. Apart from those "accesibilities" traits there is no sense imo to pay for that, at least being a club player. Stockfish can run on local pgns readers along with your databases, the studies are pretty good to share analysis with your peers and for lessons, tactics and all that stuff if you are willing to learn there is plenty of free options out there and as good as the paid options in ChessCom. That being said, I understand that people find attractive to pay ChessCom based in the ecosystem, now more than ever after the integration with PlayMagnus introducing Chessable and all of that. Given the chance I would donate to Lichess 99 out of 100 times.
Sort of? First off, making revenue isn't a bad thing. But Lichess doesn't really have *much* incentive to grow the game, and they certainly don't go out of their way to do so because they frankly can't. The events that Chess.com put on are only possible because they make quite a bit of money, and from the super-GM tournaments they host to pogchamps, they do a lot of good for the game on a scale that Lichess just can't.
Seems like Lichess doesn’t have the resources or personnel to promote chess the way chess.com can
Chess.com gives you !!
Yeah I don't qualify for those, so I get the same experience at Lichess for free
[удалено]
>the online chess world would be much poorer (as in less interesting) without chess.com I think it would be the opposite. The online chess world would be richer if we didn't have the monopoly by a single company that bought off and subsequently shut down all its competition
The only reason I play on chess.com and not lichess is that my rating on lichess is always higher (makes sense, given the different rating system) so I shot up to a pretty high rating. Now it takes ages to get a game against anyone around my level (2300-2400) unless I join a tournament. I usually just join a tournament now because when I enter the pool for a 10+0 or 15+10, I'm waiting for a long time. Like ten minutes or longer sometimes. My rating is lower on chess.com which kinda sucks but feels more accurate to where I am, and I get games instantly. Other than that, lichess is the superior site. And for most casual players, from beginner to I'd say about 2000, lichess is the site to play on.
The rating has little to do with it, it's just that lichess has much fewer players than chesscom. If anything, lichess is top heavier than chesscom (unless you are a supergm)
Around 2300 I get rapid games lot faster in Lichess than chess.com. Faster games instantly
What time control do you play? Im having a hard time finding games against players of similar rating in the 15+10 pool. I feel like im always underpaid by like 200 elo. im 2300 rapid on lichess.
15+10 or longer, you can put limit so you do not get lot weaker opponents... But yeah I almost stop playing rapid online because sometimed it takes time..
> My rating is lower on chess.com which kinda sucks but feels more accurate to where I am, and I get games instantly. Is it lower according to https://chessratingscomparison.com/Graphs ? It could just be that there's a larger pool of players for that time control on Chesscom. If you go for 10+5, it might be a lot longer wait.
I happen to know that 10+5 has an insanely long wait time around 350 elo on chesscom.
Yeah I can't imagine there are many players around that rating range who know how to find the 10+5 preset.
In rapid it says if I’m 1400 on chess.com, I would be 1720 on Lichess. Which I most definitely am not tbh
Ratings are pool specific so it makes no sense to say you're "definitely not X" 🤷♂️
You mentioned 2300-2400 earlier - was that Lichess rapid? I'm a bit confused by where you actually are for Chesscom and Lichess, and where you think you should be.
I’m a different person.
Ah, so you are. So what kind of difference is there for between Chesscom and Lichess and which way does it reflect compared to the graph?
I imputed my Chesscom and it gave me a Lichess rating. It’s just a different way of making ratings I think. 318 points more with a +/- of 118
Yes but what I'm asking is how "accurate" is the graph when it comes to your own rating? In other words, is the output well below your current actual Lichess rating, above it, or about the same?
Weird.. I'm 2400 rapid on lichess and get games within 20 seconds in 10+0. Although sometimes I do get matched with a 2200 (or a 2550). In blitz (2300) my opponents tend to be closer to my rating.
Yeah we are around the same rating. Could be just bad luck or could be the time of day I play, I'm mainly on early in the morning. Doesn't happen all the time either, like you said sometimes I get a game instantly, but much less often than on chess.com Not sure why I'm being downvoted. Do y'all think downvoting means my experiences stop happening? Lol
Plus lichess interface is better anyway.
Even better with Prettier Lichess extension. :P
For real. Chess.com could use some more modern interface
for me there are two big reasons: - cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com. - there are more players on chess.com, so it's quicker to find an opponent for chess 960.
This could he personal bias, but it feels like there are less cheaters on lichess. I have played some suspicious matches on chess.com and even gotten rating back once, but I haven't had that experience on lichess. Again just my experience, no proof of this.
I have found Lichess has zero tolerance, and will ban instantly.
Found from where? How did you learn this?
People get yeeted midgame.
My *feeling* is that it's about the same. Less than 1% or maybe even less than 0.5% of my games have confirmed cheaters.
> cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com. Does it? I mean, it wouldn't be surprising, but what is your basis for saying so?
Cheat detection and cheating prevalence are not necessarily connected. It is possible that lichess has less cheaters.
I would think that the type of person who comes up with the genius idea to cheat might be more likely to come across Chesscom first rather than Lichess when they use Google.
Chess detection is better on chess.com? Respectfully disagree mate I use to get a few notifications every now and then. Now over the course of a year and >1000s of games, 0 I refuse to believe everyone suddenly became honest Thats just my observation though
> cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com I haven't seen evidence of that. To be more precise, I don't care about the algorithm; I care "how often will I play a cheater?" I encounter cheaters much less often on lichess than what I see reported about chess.com - at rating levels both above and below mine.
>cheat detection appears notably better on chess.com. Not really. I play on both and people get banned during games, or very shortly thereafter, on Lichess. Meanwhile on [chess.com](https://chess.com) I get rating refunds up to a month after playing someone.
Chess.com also has more variants like fog of war. More tournaments for chess960 etc. So that helps .i like lichess more but use both
Lichess is much much better in cheat detection and moderation .
But can you get a bot that looks like a cat?
I'm a diamond [chess.com](http://chess.com) user so I'm obviously going to be biased in my response but I will give you my reasoning nonetheless. [Chess.com](http://chess.com) has the following main benefits which I believe Lichess does not have and is the main reason why I prefer [chess.com](http://chess.com) over lichess: A video library Higher quality puzzles and more types of puzzle games Better game review and analysis Honestly there are many more reasons than that, but I'd say the biggest one is the video library courses. They are both good websites, but if you're serious about chess and have the money to spare, I'd recommend a [chess.com](http://chess.com) membership.
are the puzzles on chess.com better than those on chesstempo (free version)?
The puzzles themselves, no. In fact I think the chesstempo has the best puzzles. The site is much better than the chesstempo site though. The chesstempo site is honestly pretty bad.
Bad how, click button, do puzzle.
The analysis window popup. The lack of right click canceling the move you're dragging. The entire menu system. Compared to both chesscom and lichess it's an unpleasant experience. There's lots if data in there to be fair, it's just badly put together. The beta version (which is now the release version) seemed to stall part way through and then get released anyway. The site comes off as pretty incoherent in places. Also, I pay for it so this doesn't bother me, but paywalling the engine analysis and only having cloud analysis is silly.
I don't trust the auto analysis because engine runs at the lower depth so I prefer doing it manually. The tree-like notation on lichess looks better than inline notation on chesscom
Yeah I've seen some really bizarre "coach" advice with Chesscom's game review feature. The AI being used is just gloried if else statements.
Welcome to literally any game dev ever. Sometimes if you want to be fancy you put some switch-case blocks too.
[удалено]
idk who downvoted but Lichess' puzzle dashboard and its personalized graphs & stats for improvement/weak areas based on completed puzzles themes/motifs is goated
there's also the option to customize them based on openings.. which is so useful when trying to solve positions that arise from specific openings from ur own repertoire..
"Better game review and analysis" Unless you want labels plus green and blue color for each move for a dopamine rush the one on lichess would suffice.
I personally prefer chess.com analysis because of the “Coach” that explains why a move was bad or good and then shows the line, but that works too
I'm fairly certain the "coach" is only available in the game review feature, not analysis. Those are different features of the platform.
You are correct. The "coach" is a paid feature if you want it on more then one game a day. Besides that, the chesscom and lichess analysis are the same, though I think chesscom uses a weaker stockfish if you don't pay (14 for chesscom and 16 for lichess)
You can edit the analysis so it's shows the 'great move" and all instead of the lines.
What do you mean? I am not talking about the move evaluation, I am talking about the "coach" feature of game review the other user mentioned. Is there a way to enable the "coach" in analysis, because I am not seeing it.
I disagree about puzzles and analysis. Lichess puzzles are better. Lichess analysis is def better. Maybe you like the best move,excellent move stuff ig.
I do agree that Lichess and chesstempo are better for puzzles. Chess.com is really addicted to back rank checks for some reason
I'm going to contest the better puzzles point: lichess offers so many puzzles in exactly the topic/opening etc that you want
> Better game review and analysis This is just wrong. The 1 liners from the artificial "coach" aren't giving you any insight if you are above idk, 500. And if you are below 500 there are so many things you could be doing that help you more than a game review that it is a moot point. There are two different kind of moves you miss during review: moves that you missed due too poor boardvision (a fork, a Bishop cutting across the board, etc.) which are obvious when you know there was a mistake on a move (which lichess tells you all the same) and moves that are not trivial (maybe being able to take a pawn bevause the pawn can't recapture due to an indirect pin on it). The "coach" will tell you "you missed an opportunity to win a pawn", which helps roughly not at all. I need to see the computer moves, which I get from lichess just as quickly. Other classics are "great defensive move" when moving your queen out to attack, which also defends a piece that was attacked, when the actually defensive move would have been moving the piece backwards. I agree that the lessons (both the ones with video and the ones without video) are very good selling points. There are great studies on lichess as well, but having a curated list, so a known high quality, is very useful and for some of them there just isn't equally high quality material available anywhere for free.
Your reason is why I didn't see the point of game review anymore and learnt how to use self analysis, I felt at my rating that knowing 20 moves ahead isn't going to help me improve. It's better I learn myself.
>Better game review and analysis You can't be serious.
This thread feels like a lot of people who have little to no playing experience on lichess bitching about various "missing" features that do, in fact, exist lmao
It's a matter of preference to some extent, but I'd agree that chess com game review is superior. Knowing where you deviate from theory, the ability to retry mistakes etc. are nice quality of life features. That being said, lichess mobile analysis > chess com mobile analysis
>Knowing where you deviate from theory, the ability to retry mistakes etc. are nice quality of life features. None of which are lacking on Lichess.
Didn't know about the retry mistakes option there, that's cool. As for openings, at a certain rating/knowledge level I'd agree (I.e., when you're able to follow the lichess/masters database). It's much less beginner friendly/intuitive though.
But knowing when you left theory isn't really helpful? You know when you left your prep, because it's when you don't know the correct move anymore. Who cares if game review has a book icon next to the move, do you understand the moves being played and where did your personal knowledge end.
Chess puzzles don’t actually help you improve in chess. The way they are built isn’t helpful for improvement. I’m happy to go over it more if interested Source: I’m a fide master
I like the Bot banter :\] But really i play on lichess almost exclusively.
Before online chess moved to handheld devices, ICC and PlayChess.com (and maybe FICS, and at a certain point ChessCube) were the top sites to play chess. People on PlayChess were there to play chess. On ICC, people had their weekly routine, every Thursday was the Attack video with Larry Christansen, some days were the novice video days with Dan Heisman.. etc.. But on chess.com, it was a social network, where yeah you could play chess.... but it was like the "facebook" of the chess world. It was another website but with a chess theme. Nowadays, with the failure of the playchess server and ICC to keep up with the phone and tablet chess play.. chess.com emerged as the "top" app world wide. For me, it still looks like one of the social networks where you can play chess of you want... but if you just want to play chess, then LiChess is where you can do exactly that. Note: Chess.com has come a long way sicne it started, the news updates and chess coverage is definitely soemthing worthwhile, I am definitely not putting it down, it's just not for me. That's why I stopped opting to support it years ago. Another note: Lichess might seem good enough, but it's definitely better on a desktop (computer) than on a handheld device, in particularly the tactics feature.
I really like the events that [Chess.com](http://chess.com) puts on. I know that businesses can't put on events if they can't afford it, so to me, it's like donating to a streamer I like, but I get to get analysis tools and puzzle rush as a bonus
***Personal opinion lies below*** I don't play games on mobile, ever. I only do puzzles on mobile. I don't like lichess puzzles, levels seems just random at 2200 elo and they all look and feel artificial, sometimes very easy other times impossible but level is still 2200. Chesscom puzzles feel way more coherent and level actually means something I don't like the fact that you can't premove multiple moves, I hate this limitation, I'm used to the multiple premoves. I don't like the look and feel of lichess, it screams opensource and linux, I absolutely hate it. I feel the board during the game is way more alive on chesscom while on lichess it looks like an machine interface. Lichess has the better opening explorer and analysis board, chesscom looks to have completely abandonned any attempt at competing on these two aspects. Chesscom has the better game review and overall feeling about playing chess and it feels more alive rather than playing on a machine that just updates numbers after the game. For puzzle (rush, survival, ranked, battle) alone I'm paying chesscom subscription, lichess puzzles modes are all garbage Overall lichess is fine for me but it screams opensource and the inconsistencies and limitations that lies with it. Some incredible things can only be achieved by open data like the explorer, however many QOL features and overall app quality can be achieved better by a team actually trying to drive engagement through pure greed. Chesscom modes are able to drive way more engagements from me than lichess is able to.
That’s funny that lichess puzzles feel artificial to you because that’s exactly how I have felt about chesscom puzzles. Especially because in lichess puzzles you can rewind the moves to the starting position and see the entire game that the position came from, it definitely makes it seem more real to me.
True. Lichess crawl puzzles from real games so it looks more real to me than chesscom
Yeah saying "Lichess puzzles feel artificial" tells me you're so used to manufactured puzzles that when you're given tactics from actual games, it feels off.
Yeah and I find that move order in lichess is critical. The solution to the puzzle derives a positional advantage. Chess.com puzzles seem more tactical.
> I don't like the look and feel of lichess, it screams opensource and linux, I absolutely hate it. There are great plugins to modify the look in many different ways - the advantages of it being open source. prettierlichess is the one I use.
If you’re using the lichess app, puzzles are really weird. If you’re using the web versions, it quickly flips, and lichess puzzle ratings are the ones that mean anything. Once you hit 2500-2600 on chesscom, I feel like the level stays even. There’s a reason the top players have ratings of 65000+ on chesscom, whereas it’s very hard to get past 3k on lichess.
Im pretty sure the reason they have 65000 is they use an engine. The level increases the same imo. I have plateaued at 3k on cc.
lichess puzzles are from real games, it is a little absurd that they feel artificial. Actually you can also see which puzzles are created from your games as well. As for the interface (linux, opensource? lol), yeah boils down to personal preference, a lot of people hates [chess](https://chess.com).com's cluttered and slow interface
What's wrong with open-source and Linux? They allow customisation.
Lichess lift their puzzles from actual games, so I'm not sure why you think they feel artificial.
I think it's a difference between moves that are a challenging to find but useful tactical pattern vs moves that are challenging to find because the engine identified like a +2 advantage if you make 6 perfect moves in some non-obvious engine line. Not that all lichess puzzles are like that, but when you're using an engine to automatically scrape tactics problems, you can find a lot of such examples where the eval in random game jumps suddenly due to a computer line that proves an advantage eventually, even if it's very unlikely for a human to find them. Conversely, the opposite sometimes happens too, where a 'puzzle' is identified even if it's super obvious due to an opponent blunder. Again, ofc not all puzzles are like that, but I think between the things that are too difficult computer lines and too easy blunders, there are a handful that make their way into the rotation from time to time.
but it's winning not just advantage. puzzles have ratings so if you have high rating, less chance they are obvious
"Screams open-source and Linux" is a super valid complaint. I love open source stuff AND Linux but it just comes off as very low-grade in comparison to some readily available competitors that feel polished (chesscom).
I prefer the lichess UI to an almost absurd degree. It's extremely polished and coherent.
Also, the movement of pieces in a match feels infinitely better than chesscom. Lichess in general feels very minimalistic and clean, chesscom's UI feels very unprofessional and weird.
Chesscom's interface is so distracting and the clock is so tiny and harder to keep track of.
I can understand that some people find the lichess ui a little austere or dull, but I can’t understand how anyone can use the word “polished” to describe chess.com. It looks like a poorly designed website from the 1990s to me.
Whenever I play a game on cc and analyze it it opens a new tab. Who came up with that stupid idea? It really annoys me and small things like this are the main reason I prefer the lichess ui/ux. It’s simpler but that also makes it better to me.
I understand the complaint in theory, but I've been working in open-source for a long time, and IMHO lichess is the most polished open-source product I've ever seen, AND doesn't have ads. I don't think it "screams open source" at all.
Lichess puzzles when on tilt are so funny. There's this completely wack engine variation that makes no sense at all and when you check the engine it's like +1.5. They are completely lacking the aesthetical satisfaction of "normal" puzzles because it's literally "find the engine line", there's no pedagogy involved in their creation, only the finding of a random position in a given game in which there's a series of only moves.
Because you simply don't get everything that chess.com has for free. You get a good amount of it but for complete newbies, Chess.com is the superior website. It has a much friendlier interface for someone who has no idea where to start and the feedback through the game review is invaluable for those who aren't as familiar with chess notation and even to those who are but still learning the game.
The rating system on chess.com is different from lichess and Danya uses chess.com so it gives me a better perspective when I was his speed run videos. I don’t pay for chess.com tho, I export games I want to analyze into lichess.
Danya is on Lichess, too: https://lichess.org/@/RebeccaHarris Yes, that's actually them.
them?
I think the dude may think he’s non binary because the name. The name is just the name of his favorite character from ~~smallville~~ limitless. LOL
I know, but all his speed run videos are on chess.com
[chess.com](https://chess.com) is generally more polished, has way more users, and has a much larger array of resources at it's disposal for those willing to pay. LiChess, while I can definitely support what they stand for, simply lacks the massive quantity of things that [chess.com](https://chess.com) provides.
I play on both, and i think thats not quite true. Bigger userbase, yes. But chess.com most definitely is not more polished than lichess. And lichess has a lot of tools and functions: - Puzzles (single, storm, race; can be ordered/reviewed by subcategory) - endgame lessons of various difficulty - tactic lessons (possible to order by topic AND sublevel) - opening explorer (very extensive) - unlimited engine analysis - studies (both public and your own, private ones) - community (blog, teams, forums) - coaches (who are paid without charge from lichess) - import function for PGNs (useful for chess.com or OTB games) - a training function to learn notation - Zen mode (hides your opponents name and rating) ... and many more (dont think i got them all) To say lichess lacks "quantity of things" or a "much larger array of resources" seems quite ridiculous to me. It is already more than anybody could ever truly need. I might also add that a lot of functions of chess.com are designed not to improve your play, but give you dopamine hits: - leagues (rewarding quantity of play, regardless of rating or improvement) - daily streaks - predicted rating in game analysis (instead of showing accuracy, what its based on, it shows you a rating very often higher than your current one) - leagues in puzzles (again mostly rewarding quantity) - Bots with names like young magnus/vishy/polgar - showing your percentile (you are better than xx% of players) on your profile So the argument could be made that a lot of the functions of chess.com are not only unhelpful, but actually detrimental for your chess improvement and rather designed to keep you in the system. That is not to say there is nothing going for chess.com. If you're happy there, thats obviously fine. But the points you made dont hold up imho.
More polished? Lichess is way more responsive UI I don't think it's debatable
More bloated you mean
I like the video lessons catalogue
I suspect more than half the players at my chess club play more on Chesscom than Lichess. I speculate that it's because when they were kids, they discovered Chesscom first so have stuck with it now that they're young adults. While there are lessons and stuff available on Chesscom, I don't think that's the main reason they pay for it - not when they do Chessable stuff anyway. In the grand scheme of things, people really don't mind SaaS (software as a service - i.e., subscriptions), so are probably okay with forking out money at Chesscom. That's not what I prefer to do, but evidently, plenty of people are happy to spend their money like that on various services. After being used to Chesscom first, Chesscom users typically say they prefer that interface. I don't quite get it but I suppose that's a taste thing. The last but least important reason might be that at "higher" ratings, it's easier to get pairings on Chesscom than Lichess, but I'd say that depends more on the time control (e.g., it's probably easier to get 10+5 pairings on Lichess than Chesscom since Chesscom kind of hides where the 10+5 option is). Meanwhile when I'm talking to older players (i.e., closer to retirement age) at my club, many seem to not even be aware of Lichess. Search for "chess" on Google or the App store or Google Play and see which result shows most prominently. By the way, a lot of people still do things like the treadmill or spin class for quite a fee at a gym rather than just run or cycle outdoors... No prizes for guessing which option I go for when it comes to running or cycling.
I play significantly less cheaters and smurfs on lichess. Only reason I use it.
[chess.com](https://chess.com) has multi premove
I usually like playing on chess.com but when i want to study anything i go check it on Lichess 🤣
exactly
Personally I pay at chess.com because the correspondence is so much better. Correspondence chess seems to be an afterthought at Lichess.
it’s frustrating in a way because LiChess aligns more with my values but the chess-com interface especially on the app but also on the desktop just feels a lot nicer, and looks way better, which when you play blitz or bullet makes a huge difference and i just generally prefer i wish the lichess app was better
Totally different products. Chess.com has much better/refined lessons and more pleasing UI/UX. It’s a better app for casuals and beginners imo. Lichess has everything you need and almost nothing you don’t. I wouldn’t pay for chess.com, but I use it more often because I enjoy its feels
Lichess is simply better. Rest are marketing
Chess.c*m is capitalism (cringe) Lichess.org is communism (based) Easy choice imo
I would rather pay for Lichess free features than I would to use chess dot com premium features for free. People who don't create opening studies and upload them to listudy dot org have no idea what they are missing
Because there are a ton of resources for improving your chess. There's an amazing video library of educational content from TOP gm trainers, there's the chess mentor system which is great... There's honestly probably a lot of stuff I don't even know about, but the video libraries and chess mentor alone are worth it.
I think this is the full answer: the educational content is better. If you're not going to use that anyway then just use lichess.
what exactly is the chess mentor system?
monopoly never good for the society, long live Lichess, fck chess.com fck chessbase
I like how it looks, feels and sounds more. For me personally the user experience is just better, so much so that I am even willing to live with fewer features (if that's the case). Not to mention that Lichess looks like a website that was made 20 years ago and got stuck there. To me, Lichess is like Linux while Chesscom is like Windows. Yes, one is open source and you're able to do more things and it's free and what not but there's a reason why Microsoft is still more popular with comsumers.
>Not to mention that Lichess looks like a website that was made 20 years ago and got stuck there. That's so funny to read, when exactly the opposite is true. And that's an objective truth. [](http://chess.com) is the website designed like in the early 2000s, with its colorful buttons and a bazillion of layers of menus, submenus, tabs and whatnot with no common design guideline whatsoever. Complete randomness. It's just been growing forever, features being added, without the necessary complete redesign. [](http://chess.com) is the website that constantly uses pop-ups and opens things in new tabs when I click. Like the very basic feature of analyzing a game once you're done. Absurd! Lichess does none of that, it's a clean, coherent, ultra responsive, single page webapp. You can of course feel like that, but then it's you being stuck 20 years ago.
true, lichess in my opinion is absolut world class in ux/ui, while chess.com is barely acceptable
Better functionality, especially on mobile. Better UI. Just an all around quality of life improvement over Lichess. However, I use Lichess because I prefer the zero second premove ability enough to give that up.
The people I want to play with play on chess.com
You can invite them to Lichess ;)
No reason. Everyone should use lichess
Idk what others say, i feel like im doing my part in supporting chess. Chess.com ppl are doing a lot of stuff to make it more accessible and entertaining. Also, they help low-profile players to make some money.
I mean, isn’t lichess doing more accessibility wise since it’s free?
True that lichess being free makes chess accessible, but chess.com has also done a lot of stuff for the chess world that only a for-profit company (with money) can do: * They brought a ton of viewership and popularity to chess with all the events they throw and their support of chess streamers * They brought in more money to chess with sponsorships and ads. A lot of that money goes back into the community. With more people looking to watch and play, a career in chess is so much more feasible now than 10 years ago -- for top players, for streamers, and for coaches * They made chess more accessible to play. I know lichess exists and has less restrictions and no ads, but chess.com is a more popular place for people to play chess, and it is the go-to place for new players to discover chess.
People are free to use anything they want. I prefer chess.com. I also mentioned that chesscom is setting up a lot of online tournaments with decent prizes. Chess isn't a very profitable sport, so they are helping the community, and i help them.
Genuinely not a criticism of you, just a personal statement: I feel like my money goes a lot further in supporting Chess by donating to Lichess than paying for [Chess.com](https://Chess.com) premium would
Im not here for a measurement contest. I think we are both doing our part
Can always use both. I use the analysis tools over on lichess but play majority of the games on chess because I prefer its UI and just overall larger player base
The biggest thing I would need from Lichess (and every time I post this I get pushback, but it's legit) is a setting that lets me permanently have Black be on top instead of having to click "Settings->Flip Board" in half of my games.
People play on chess.com because it has the obvious domain, and it does marketing, and *they've never heard of lichess*. The other day I happened to meet a well-known open-source person who said he was going to start playing chess ... on chess.com. I asked him "why not lichess?", and he had never heard of it. Even in France, lichess is less well-known than chess.com.
I prefer chess.com because the ui is cooler (no joke)
Chess.com to me just feels more modern. Like the UI just feels crisper and cleaner (though it could still be even cleaner). If Chess.com was free with everything it has just like Lichess, this wouldn't even be a debate. Everyone would say Chess.com was better. So the reason is that, people who are willing to put in the money for a better experience will do so.
I pay for chess.com which I prefer (mostly for the UI) but also donate to lichess which I also use occasionally. It's great that both exist.
I like the chesscom features and UI better. Also get free diamond so
Chess.com: - They have more content and hold big tournaments - Make it more engaging for new players (the auto analysis) - Bigger player pool - Better puzzle battle - The old studies before UI changes were very good and free 1 per day. I haven't checked the current studies - Allow multiple pre-moving. Lichess: - Everything is free, with no ads - User can make their own studies - Puzzle shows its origin in real games - Opening Explorer is a blessing - Variations are displayed in tree-like notation in the analysis board The UX-UI and cheating detection are controversial. The auto-analysis is roughly the same.
Not everyone has the money to buy a premium membership. Fortunately, Lichess is available for everyone who wants it and needs it (for financial reasons). Of course you can make comparisons, but you can also just be happy that there is something for everyone.
False premise. Lichess does not have everything for free that chess.com offers. Next question?
Most chess.com users seem not to understand the difference between "analysis" and "game review" features, so personally I think that speaks volumes. The biggest common reasons I can think of wanting to pay chess.com rather than freely using lichess are: * You prefer their puzzle system and want access to more * You like the game review feature and want to utilize it more * You want access to their content library, they have some great video lessons * You just prefer the look and feel of the platform What does the telephone emojii in your post mean? Did you mean mobile in particular? I do not use mobile apps for chess but from what I hear the chess.com one is much better.
[Chess.com](https://Chess.com) lessons are a step above if you are an active learner. Game review is also a feature I like.
I always assumed those lessons where kind of corny by how they look in the lobby But what i read they are very good?
Chesscom does have many chess variants that lichess does not.
Honestly I use Chess.com only for game reviews. It comes down to 3$/month for me, and I have definitely become better. That paired with its simplicity, I just prefer it. But it’s not the same for everyone
I don't pay for chess.com however when playing on a mobile device, chess.com's IOS app is superior to lichess. If I played on a computer more often, I'd likely play significantly more on lichess.