StormCentre3 wrote:
CC excels at marketing...
as well as in the dumbing down of chess.
Ball of Confusion
Sort:
hi
Jun 27, 2021
0
#24
Cornfed wrote:
What we have here is essentially the the difference between a serious newspaper vs a tabloid....
That seems to me to be a appropriate analogy, or even a book vs a comic book
How are you do
As batgirl pointed out, “ the proof is in the pudding “ unfortunately the pudding is not always tasty ! 😩
batgirl wrote:
I noticed the thread If you want to play chess, play on lichess.com was locked (as it probably should be) but that leads to some confusion as to what's allowed/not allowed since other threads comparing chess.com to other sites have been left alone without any announced change in rules. So, it's ok until it isn't??
Along the same lines, I also noticed advertising here: Chess writing, help
and obscenity blatantly and purposefully posted here: Chess girl video
both of which have been up for a while now with no action taken.
I played on Lichess.org..not really a great site. It seems old. That's why I switched to chess.com because it's newer. Lichess never gets any updates, and the bots are no fun.
Jun 30, 2021
0
#28
Lichess - got a friend who basically on plays there...but the interface is horrible and the board is nearly as nice as chess.com. I therefore only play on chess.com
Impossible for a topic to last such as “Comparing Chess Sites” with the present format of OP’s owning the thread (often one of multiple threads on the same topic). Very few threads last more than days. They are meant to be discarded. Revenue makers. The ones that last have a faithful following as any diverse opinions have long been filtered out.
The 'current environment'...being chess.com hemorraging paid memberships as we discover sites that aren't obsessed with lame POG and such?
I'm not a fan of PogChamps but I don't mind that it exists as a niche. I do mind the excessive focus on it and streaming in place of what I would consider real chess (as opposed to entertainment chess).
The Marshall Spectator (put out by the Marshall Chess Club) wrote in the last issue:
"Chess.com has conducted a brilliant marketing ploy to drum up interest in PogChamps. PogChamps is a bracket format tournament made up of amateur chess playing celebrities and influencers battling over a large prize fund entirely for charity. Often, these patzers bring with them an audience of tens of millions of followers from instagram, tik tok, twitch, and/or youtube, introducing them to chess in the process. While some of the competitors show a formidable understanding of the game, most are still in the realm of “utter beginner.” After the success of the last PogChamps—which featured the likes of Rainn Wilson and Mr. Beast, I wondered if it was possible the next one could be even better. Then it was announced that it would feature investors, analysts, and youtubers from the rapidly growing cryptocurrency space."
I think the key phrase is brilliant marketing ploy though my definition of brilliant and theirs might differ. The world is changing, but not all the change is for the better.
Sure, the more the merrier. I do not disagree.
But...many of us who like 'real' chess by contrast - real chess being something that at least strives to approach really good chess, something all can strive for - are being marginalized in favor of this approach. Fads come and go.
There is a reason Magnus Corp (whatever it is called) is gobbling up 'real chess' left and right. It will remain long after the fads have gone. What we have here is essentially the the difference between a serious newspaper vs a tabloid. The POGsters will go on to the next (non chess fad) they can try to make $$ at...real chess will remain.
I love a few streamers for sure - Naka (except when he's pocketing his POG paychecks...) but chess.com does not have a lock on those.
I went from a DIAMOND to GOLD membership for these reasons. Too many sites out there catering to what I like about the game to waste any more than 'Gold' membership money here.
Others mileage may vary of course.