The Downfall of Chess.com

Chess.com is by far the most popular chess site in the world. It's seen by many as the premium platform of online chess. However, in the past year following the chess boom, chess.com has made many delusional decisions negatively impacting the site's reputation. 

Firstly, let's take a look at leagues. Leagues are highly controversial; it seems everyone has a love/hate relationship with leagues. However, it is obvious to see that leagues are nothing more than a ploy to boost marketing statistics. Chess.com used leagues to encourage more games on the site, but they also encouraged a dramatic spike in cheating/sandbagging. Leagues provided a competitive new way to track your progress, but is the payback of rampant cheating worth it? 

Secondly, let's examine Verification. Verification adds credibility to your account and gives you exclusive access to tournaments. However, verification seems like an awkward step for chess.com to try to expand their business. Many people argue that their membership should pay for this verification process as well. They see no point in having to pay for features that lichess has for free and then paying extra for some "verification". Here one member sums it up, 

"Once a while i pop in here to see if there is a more formal comment from chess.com - 366 comments in this short time should be paid attention to.

Verify wil not stop cheating - what users were looking for is a more robust vetting (this should be core, and not a for fee service)- also there should be difference for free to play players and premium players and it should not be coupled to tournaments. - yes it is possible that in a occasion somebody get a premium acount gifted and wants to cheat. Chess.com has the way to spot that already. 

The messaging and what chess.com intended to achieve as a business are not aligned - hence the comments, because people, might not be articulating it clearly etc, however intiuitivly they feel something is not adding up. 

This need to be corrected and addressed by chess.com"

Finally, Treasure Chess NFT's. Many people are questioning why chess.com has added this NFT system. To many, it is completely illogical for a chess website to be investing in crytpo-currency. What is the need for this odd marketplace anyway? Because they can? Furthermore, people are disputing chess.com's false claim that "selling an NFT takes as much energy as an email". 

In conclusion, chess.com's unwise business decisions in the past year have eluded to the inevitable downfall of chess.com. The site has not been successful in advancing their platform; it seems they are unpredictably adding new features left and right, without any goal of legitimately making the site better. Chess.com's reputation is already completely decimated in many people's eyes, and it is in the process of being swept over by it's competitors. Curious to see your thoughts on the downfall of chess.com...

I'm curious to see everyone's thoughts. 

Especially the moderators. 

Why would moderator thoughts be any better than anyone else's?

In my opinion, the site seems to be growing like it has year after year and they are trying to keep improving as time goes on. Part of that improvement is trying out new things.

lol

I agree with you on all points, but if you don’t like it, can’t you just not use it? Just play chess, and it doesn’t affect you whatsoever. I don’t think chess.com will “fall” because it still has not changed what a majority of players are here for - good ol’ chess.

You say leagues are highly controversial but they're not.
You say leagues are competitive, a way to track progress, and encourage cheating, but they're none of these things. You go up in rank simply for playing. You can be rated under 1000 and in legend league. It doesn't track progress since there's no demotion, and so there's no incentive to cheat.

The difference between membership and verification is a phone number and they say it will be expanded (beyond what it is now which is just tournaments). You quote someone who says it wont stop cheating, but no one claimed it would, and it obviously does discourages cheating. It's a perfectly sensible feature.

NFTs are not cryptocurrency, and even if they were, why would it be unwise for chess.com (or any business) to invest in it?

Chess.com is growing and is adding new features. Your post about how it's failing is silly.

“It doesn't track progress since there's no demotion, and so there's no incentive to cheat.”

yeah, but you gain trophies for winning. what’s the best way to win? cheat. the incentive is getting more trophies more quickly. even if there’s no demotion and you don’t lose trophies if you lose, people will still cheat to gain trophies.

I prophesized it years ago: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/rise-and-fall-of-chesscom

Joking apart, I don't like the direction the site has taken. Downvotes offer nothing of value and just make the forum a worse place. Leagues are, as you said, intented to boost the number of games played, but what worries me is that  they resemble those shady strategies mobile games use to make their games addictive. NFTs have no room in a chess site, even if they weren't as controversial as they are. I don't really mind verification though. Paying for a blue check and a chance to play in an online tournament doesn't appeal to me, but I'm not against it per se.

However, they have the absolute best name for a chess site and they are the first result when googling "chess", so I guess they can get away with all this nonsense.

After all, we're still here.

If staff is reading this, please freeze my rapid rating at 1100 for 100 games.

If I lose 15-20% then I'll agree with this person.

(I mean, no test is needed because you're wrong, but it would still be fun to do this)

Most promotions only require a few hours of playing during the week.

And cheat detection is still largely automatic. I don't believe that cheating has spiked.

Mostly True Chess.com does have more free players then any chess web site (except maybe lichess) there are few paid members to support the free members and the mods and the titled players.

The definition of insanity is doing the same harmful thing and expecting different results (like taking away what people want and pay for and adding what they don't want)

I could go on but want waste time,until today I was a paid member (I timed out of three games my time out ratio when up to 38% why should I pay chess.com fee's to get penalized (I don't live in that state)

And to fight cheating just don't let people play free and make money if they beat a player rated well above them in a regular tournament there are rules and regulations none of which chess.com can and/or will implement.

chess.com's unwise business decisions in the past year have eluded to the inevitable downfall of chess.com. The site has not been successful in advancing their platform; it seems they are unpredictably adding new features left and right, without any goal of legitimately making the site better.

well then why donchu try2take it over ?...i mean ur talking like a big hotshot know-all CEO. put ur $ where ur mouth is & take it over. lets see wutchu got doophus boomer...

It’s a critique. You don’t need to be an artist to know when someone makes bad art, or a movie director to point out that there is a plot hole. You’re diverting.

1. ratio

2. yb better

3. i can agree with one point and that is nfts are kinda a stretch

There’s nothing inherently wrong with wanting profit unless it directly affects the site in a major way. Having an option that you can simply not participate in, isn’t that bad.

its esp 'cheeky' if shrek iznt a paying member. if he's dissing Mister Chess Dot Com w/a FREE acct ?...then heeza ( )*( )

I got to say, I am quite happy here.