My Lichess rating is higher too, but you are all wrong. The standard is the same.
The lag on chess.com is ridiculous. I am fighting the whole time simply to secure the time allocated to me. IE 3mins does not mean 3 mins on chess.com.
If it feels lighter on lichess, it's because it is, not because other players are worse.
By the way, to keep this thread alive, my Lichess rating is 2330, while here it is 2305. Not that much of a difference, really.
Chess.com is a great site. It does remove cheats quickly when they are reported.
It is grossly unfair to come to this site, get the benefits free and then bad mouth it. Rating systems are not important. Enjoy the game for its artistic pleasure and you will be happier.
Blow, blow, thou winter wind,
Thou art not so unkind
As man’s ingratitude;
Thy tooth is not so keen,
Because thou art not seen,
Although thy breath be rude.
By the way, to keep this thread alive, my Lichess rating is 2330, while here it is 2305. Not that much of a difference, really.
I see your rapid is 2205 here. What is your classical on Lichess?
I don't play Rapid on here anymore, so it's underrated. When I played Rapid, my rating was the same as in Blitz since 2050 elo. I don't play classical on Lichess, but my Rapid rating there is 2410, although I haven't played Rapid on there for a while, too.
i will go for Chess2Play.com
I wouldnt agree that they are soft, both have different rating systems so of course both players arent the exact same strength. I am 2400 in blitz and bullet on there but lower rated here which I think is the accurate rating considering the competitive pools but lichess gets way harder as you climb. I definitely dont want to underestimate how everything on the other site is as I like it as well
. What I noticed, though, is that on lichess I'm only in the 89th percentile or so in Blitz, while here it's the 98th without trying too hard. "
That is curious isn't it? My lichess blitz rating is 2205 (95.1%) And my chess.com blitz rating is 2015 (99.8%). Both are about as high as I can get them. So chess.com apparently has relatively far more lower rated players.
idk lol im 2000 blitz on chess.com and i don't really play on lichess but lichess's rating system is confusing pretty sure lichess is more inflated but I could be wrong.
My theory is there is way more underrated players here with newly created accounts.
Yes that is a big difference. If you start on lichess in a handful of games you achieve your average rating. At chess.com you play a hundred plus games in the lower ratings before you get there. And from my own experience the opposition could be pretty tough. In blitz I started play a 600 player loosing 4 times before I could win one. I lost many games to ratings that would give me according to ELO logic 100% winning chances. It was fun though. I'd like to do it again!
chess.com is far more inflated than lichess ratings that's for sure
for real tho
My theory is there is way more underrated players here with newly created accounts.
Yes that is a big difference. If you start on lichess in a handful of games you achieve your average rating. At chess.com you play a hundred plus games in the lower ratings before you get there. And from my own experience the opposition could be pretty tough. In blitz I started play a 600 player loosing 4 times before I could win one. I lost many games to ratings that would give me according to ELO logic 100% winning chances. It was fun though. I'd like to do it again!
What are you talking about. It took me over 20 games to get from 1500 starter rating to around 2200 where I Was on chess.com when I first made my lichess account.
By contrast, if we assume I was a lichess 2200 and just made his first chess.com account, one game is all that is needed. (set rating to expert - win one game. maybe two.)
By contrast, if we assume I was a lichess 2200 and just made his first chess.com account, one game is all that is needed. (set rating to expert - win one game. maybe two.)
Well... if one begins at a platform ... one is a beginner is he not? I wouldn't want to start with a high rating. That sort of leaves nothing to achieve. Actually that is the only reason I play at chess.com. A great feature! Start at the bottom.
i remember when i was like 1400 on lichess under the account @SilverKnight101 which is kinda sad that i later changed the name to @SILVERKNIGHT101 which is practically the same thing but hate the higher casing. i think it was in the summer, i was at my aunts house and i cant even find the exact game in which i reached 2000 but this was the one game i think might have been it. back then i didnt know how to even be social or even how to use any features at all that the game itself is basically lost somewhere in my archive.
the memories felt amazing, i still remember cheering while my aunt looked at me weirdly lol
fun fact - my youtube channel was originally name silverknight101 till i changed it as it felt lame and even tho my current name is not as good i thought it was a better change 
At least lichess has unlimited puzzles, lessons, and drills! 
Weird though. Lichess is better in many respects. But I am playing here.
There must be more reason other then starting at a low rating. Oh I do like bullet here. So maybe it's the premove thing.
Don't forget to apologize to your aunt for dancing on her good sunday table Kowarenai
Weird though. Lichess is better in many respects. But I am playing here.
There must be more reason other then starting at a low rating. Oh I do like bullet here. So maybe it's the premove thing.
Don't forget to apologize to your aunt for dancing on her good sunday table Kowarenai
that was last summer and i never danced on her table lol
she was more confused at why i was yelling or cheering after the game, it was on phone
My theory is there is way more underrated players here with newly created accounts.
Yes that is a big difference. If you start on lichess in a handful of games you achieve your average rating. At chess.com you play a hundred plus games in the lower ratings before you get there. And from my own experience the opposition could be pretty tough. In blitz I started play a 600 player loosing 4 times before I could win one. I lost many games to ratings that would give me according to ELO logic 100% winning chances. It was fun though. I'd like to do it again!
What are you talking about. It took me over 20 games to get from 1500 starter rating to around 2200 where I Was on chess.com when I first made my lichess account.
By contrast, if we assume I was a lichess 2200 and just made his first chess.com account, one game is all that is needed. (set rating to expert - win one game. maybe two.)
Thats because you are a 2200 rated player. I'm a beginner and my experience is much different. And you can't really compare ratings. You should be looking at how consistently you are matched up or what your rating is in relation to the rest of the community you are rated in. In my case it took me months for me to get from 100 to 600 on chess.com after massive fluctuations. Where my rating on lichess has pretty much never changed staying with 100 points the whole time. When I started I made an account on both sites, but recentlt playing mostly on lichess because I feel their community is more honest and legit, at least at my level.
Take a look at Fuchuina, I have criticized his account on here many times since he admitted he was banned and newly created it. He started at 1200 or 1400 and it took him almost 200 games with massive 20 game winning streaks, amost a 50 game win streat at one point to get to 2100. So honestly, I should be asking you wtf are you talking about, you are repeating myths.
What I mean, is that on chess.com you are given the option to choose your starting rating. I don't really know why kowarenai did not choose expert when he made his second account, but he could have.
If you choose 'expert' you start with a 2000 rating. It defaults to 'new at chess', which is 400 rating I believe.
On lichess you do not have that option-everyone starts at 1500. I was simply pointing out the differences.
Neither use Elo. Chesscom uses Glicko and lichess.org uses Glicko-2