I am a member of both,but I am only a paying member of the ICC.

Why should I switch from the ICC to Chess.com?

What is the difference between them?

Which is the best?

Well you are a member of both, so you tell me what the difference is!

As ICC is almost exclusively for blitz and rapid it's really a question of what time controls you prefer. Obviously ICC is way superior to the live chess here, but it has nothing to compete with the excellent turn-based play here. That's the difference, it's a matter of taste which is best.

i was a paying member of both and i think it is relevant that i am now only a paying member here.

icc dont have turn based games only blitz.

You should pay for both!

ICC is for blitz, tournament commentary, simuls with strong players, and educational videos. Chess.com is for correspondence chess, networking, and database hunting.

Apples and Oranges.

ICC was the global leader in online live chess. It has been eclipsed by Playchess, which has a superior interface. Both have their merits.

The live chess here is in Beta, and has no where near the features offered by ICC in 1997, let alone today.

Chess.com is on the cusp of becoming the top turn-based site. It is not there just yet IMHO, but it is very new compared to the competition. I think it is debatable which turn-based site is best, and Chess.com should certainly have its advocates.

Oh, I've spent years on ICC and Playchess, as well as several other similar sites. I've been playing turn-based/on-line correspondence for more than five years, and played the old postcard correspondence before that. I've played on more than a dozen turn-based sites, including ChessWorld, Red Hot Pawn, Game Knot, Chess Here, Chess Maniac, and others not worth mentioning.

I expect to be joining the ranks of paying members here when I let another membership at another site expire.

I've been and playing in so many chess websites. I think I'm going to be permanent here, on chess.com and slowly reducing my games on the other websites. My reasons are simple. This website got almost everything that I want out of chess (and many others) that I couldn't get from the other websites, especially human touch. I have faith that chess.com will soon improve on Beta Live Game and make it more stable.

popinjay wrote : Art I wonder if you have tried the ICC, I was just curious since you call this site the world premier chess site, then you must consider the ICC the Universe premier chess site. Look,I like this site but you guys are getting carried away a little, don't you think. The list is great but please someone tell me why I should drop the ICC for chess.com, I am being serious about this question. I just started playing chess about a year ago and love the game but I get tired or hearing how great this site is when it is just mediocre. I have made several friends here and think this site is good as a free site but again I ask with a strait face what is the major deference's between chess.com and the ICC.

If I could make a request, that chess.com create a GM mentoring program for young beginning chess players like my self. I have researched my area and have found a few GM that charge $50.00 an hour, now if you could offer this type of program for life time members then I would see the benifite in joining.

I would like to say that I have great respect for the work that is done at this site and for the dedication that is shown by some of its members.

Thanks for all the feedback, I will be taking some time to absorb all that has been said however, Art I looked at some of the responses to chess.com and none of them compare the site to ICC which leads me to wonder if they have ever tried it.

I agree with ziryab when he said.

"Chess.com is on the cusp of becoming the top turn-based site. It is not there just yet IMHO, but it is very new compared to the competition. I think it is debatable which turn-based site is best, and Chess.com should certainly have its advocates."

Thanks ziryab,

Pop

,

,

,

I have only done a bit with ICC and from above comments sounds like it is better for live chess type play.  The reason I am a paying member of Chess.com is for it's learning tools - I love the tactics trainer, computer workout & especially Chess Mentor.  I prefer turn based to live chess and have enjoyed the experience here at Chess.com, but that alone wouldn't make me a paying member.  For me it's about the learning tools. 

ICC and chess.com are quite different - ICC is mostly for live chess, while chess.com offers community features, vote chess and learning tools.

I've been a member of ICC in the past.  I'm a member here now, primarily because these days I prefer the turn-based (correspondence) pace, which ICC does not offer, and because I think the training & research tools here are superior.  The community *is* unfortunately somewhat lacking in higher-end players, but perhaps that is something that Erik can work on.

Aside from the pure feature-comparison level, though, I've never been a fan of ICC's business practices.  I'm pleased to support a decent alternative.

I wonder why no one here is mentioning FICS (Free Internet Chess Server) which imho is better then ICC as you don't have to pay, and you can play and/or use all features including puzzlebot, end game bot etc for free and unlimited. (IMHO BabasChess interface is the best front-end for FICS server)

Chess.com seems nice corespondance chess site. I am not paying anywhere yet and I might join this site as I like some of features that I don't see on other site (been member on many of the sites, and atm. playing mostly at chessmaniac.com ) but major problem I have is time, not the money. :(

i have been a member of icc and enjoyed it but am not in position to pay,i pay to play in a club live chess ,which imo beats internet chess hands down.

Velid> I wonder why no one here is mentioning FICS (Free Internet Chess Server) which imho is better then ICC as you don't have to pay,

I agree FICS is free and comparable to ICC for live chess. However, I would point out that ICC has coaching options and educational videos. Whether one service is better than the other depends on what you're shopping for.  I spend the most time on chess.com.

Well, the biggest difference I think: if you want to cheat, you come to chess.com. Otherwise you go to ICC.

This sounds tough but I am simply astonished of the high level of play I encounter here, both in live chess and turn-based. Right now, in turned based chess, there are about 500 players rated above 2200. That is huge, given that the starting rating is 1200 (and not 1400).

In terms of training tools, I think that ICC and chess.com are evenly matched. Tactics trainer at chess.com is far better and contains much more problems than trainingbot.

In my experience, FICS had way too many computers, and way too little oversight against cheating.  If you get your rocks off by hooking up Crafty to a FICS account and reveling in your astronomical rating, more power to you... I just don't want to play you.  Getting a good interface working is also a bit of a PITA compared to chess.com or ICC.

ICC & chess.com ratings are both pretty inflated.  My USCF OTB rating never cracked 1800, but in both ICC live and chess.com Online, I'm 2000-2100.  Ultimately, though, it's not that important as long as you mind the context -- relative rating strength compared to other players within the same system is what matters.

I am a paying member of ICC and Chess.com.

ICC has much tougher blitz opponents (although I have got my butt handed to me on chess.com as well) but chess.com has many more fun features, so I have to say I prefer chess.com. 

As others have said the ICC live chess interface is much better. 

Some of the training videos on ICC are superb (Lendermann and Alterman come to mind).

But chess.com has the outstanding tactics trainer and it seems like a friendlier place overall.  Plus it may sound like a minor thing - although you might say that quality consists of many small things done right - but I like having the country flags next to the players. 

In some ways chess.com remainds me of ICC ten years ago.  I liked it better then.

My experience of FICS was that it was not a terribly friendly place to play. ICC seemed a bit chilly in spots too; still, it was kinda nice to be able to watch say Andersson and Quinteros play a game (even if it was only 3 minute). Also, the look of both those sites was pretty cave; it's not much more advanced than the GREEN LETTERS ALL IN CAPS bit that we used to have to deal with years ago. And that business of scrolling down endlessly through "next"'s to find out about commands and such...strictly for the Flintstones. One of chess.com's greatest strengths is its appearance; unlike these other places, it was actually designed by someone with eyesight. And these here forum posts are much more attractive and readable than the usual cramped, stacked-on-top-of-one-another look that you get with other sites. (Hm, this is "a site with sight"...I kinda like that.)