what is your chess.com rating compared to your Lichess rating?
Sort:
Had fun reading back on this thread. Don’t go on forums much anymore, so I didn’t see most of these comments for awhile. Glad I made this thread, some very fun discussion came out if it 😊
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
May 2, 2022
0
#143
Strangely, more players but a smaller percentage stand above me on chessdotcom than on Lichess.
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
May 2, 2022
0
#145
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
May 2, 2022
0
#146
CooloutAC wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
I think you deserve an award for that. Its very respectable and honorable. And extremely rare in this day and age. I think chess.com should give awards to players who have their account more then a year or two. Maybe give an award every year making it more special the older the account is if enough games played. Salute to you. 07
Thanks. They do give annual medals/trophies.
May 2, 2022
0
#147
CooloutAC wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
I think you deserve an award for that. Its very respectable and honorable. And extremely rare in this day and age. I think chess.com should give awards to players who have their account more then a year or two. Maybe give an award every year making it more special the older the account is if enough games played. Salute to you. 07
Thanks. They do give annual medals/trophies.
great!
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
That is great. I just want to make clear that my statement that I believe chess.com has more beginners should not be interpreted as the same as chess.com has less stronger players.
May 3, 2022
0
#150
Jimemy wrote:
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
That is great. I just want to make clear that my statement that I believe chess.com has more beginners should not be interpreted as the same as chess.com has less stronger players.
Chessdotcom has more of everything.
Lichess is an excellent site and getting better. Chessdotcom is also getting better. Both sites have features I would change.
On Lichess, there is no way to contact an admin about problems. I have several that are ongoing, such as the extremely slow pairings in Arena. Lichess forums get archived. One of my threads was archived because my question was answered. That it was answered incompetently did not matter. On Chessdotcom they last forever. But one active chessdotcom thread no longer has the original post because it received too many downvotes.
I am a premium member here and a patron at Lichess. Both sites earn my money.
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
That is great. I just want to make clear that my statement that I believe chess.com has more beginners should not be interpreted as the same as chess.com has less stronger players.
Chessdotcom has more of everything.
Lichess is an excellent site and getting better. Chessdotcom is also getting better. Both sites have features I would change.
On Lichess, there is no way to contact an admin about problems. I have several that are ongoing, such as the extremely slow pairings in Arena. Lichess forums get archived. One of my threads was archived because my question was answered. That it was answered incompetently did not matter. On Chessdotcom they last forever. But one active chessdotcom thread no longer has the original post because it received too many downvotes.
I am a premium member here and a patron at Lichess. Both sites earn my money.
I play on both sites to.
Then we can compare relative numbers to absolute numbers. Were the relative numbers would be the beginners divided by the total of players on that site. So my point being that i think chess.com has more beginners in relative numbers compared to Lichess. Since if you play rapid on both sites. you will see that one site might say you are better then 85% of the playerbase while the other says 90% of its playerbase even do it is the same person player. So the variables would kinda be either how they measure the active playerbase or how many people are beginners relative the playerbase.
So i am not talking about what sites is good or bad. I like both sites to.
May 3, 2022
0
#152
Jimemy wrote:
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
Ziryab skrev:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
That is great. I just want to make clear that my statement that I believe chess.com has more beginners should not be interpreted as the same as chess.com has less stronger players.
Chessdotcom has more of everything.
Lichess is an excellent site and getting better. Chessdotcom is also getting better. Both sites have features I would change.
On Lichess, there is no way to contact an admin about problems. I have several that are ongoing, such as the extremely slow pairings in Arena. Lichess forums get archived. One of my threads was archived because my question was answered. That it was answered incompetently did not matter. On Chessdotcom they last forever. But one active chessdotcom thread no longer has the original post because it received too many downvotes.
I am a premium member here and a patron at Lichess. Both sites earn my money.
I play on both sites to.
Then we can compare relative numbers to absolute numbers. Were the relative numbers would be the beginners divided by the total of players on that site. So my point being that i think chess.com has more beginners in relative numbers compared to Lichess. Since if you play rapid on both sites. you will see that one site might say you are better then 85% of the playerbase while the other says 90% of its playerbase even do it is the same person player. So the variables would kinda be either how they measure the active playerbase or how many people are beginners relative the playerbase.
So i am not talking about what sites is good or bad. I like both sites to.
I suspect so, but to confirm need some data from average players. I’m in the top 10-12% OTB and much higher on all websites. Chessdotcom has very low average ratings.
May 3, 2022
0
#153
CooloutAC wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Jimemy wrote:
gigi_yo skrev:
My Chess.com rapid rating, (10+0), is 1416 and it claims that 94.3% of players have a lower rating than me.
My Lichess rapid rating, (10+0), is 1881 and it claims that 83.0% of players have a lower rating than me.
Go figure.
My guess is that most people start at chess.com and some advance to lichess later. Because if you goggle chess, chess.com is the first thing you find so it makes sense to start here. So it makes sense that chess.com whould have more players that are new to chess/beginners.
I started playing online at Chess.net in the late 1990s, then ICC beginning in 1999. I've been on chessdotcom longer than the site has had live chess. I've also been on Lichess most of its existence. I've played on both sites today. My game on chessdotcom was the better game. Sometimes it goes the other way.
I've beat more titled players on chessdotcom in the past two months than I've played on Lichess in five years.
I think you deserve an award for that. Its very respectable and honorable. And extremely rare in this day and age. I think chess.com should give awards to players who have their account more then a year or two. Maybe give an award every year making it more special the older the account is if enough games played. Salute to you. 07
i think chess.com already does that
I don't have a lichess account yet, but I want to get one soon :)
Bulet: 1155 here and 1395 there
😅😅😅
I made a lichess account but haven’t played any games because the site layout violates my high standards.
Jun 5, 2022
0
#159
1300 rapid chess.com. 1500 rapid lichess. I don't like lichess so I don't play there anymore. Player pool sucks and I prefer chess.com layout much more
