When deciding between Lichess and Chess.com, chess players are often faced with the question of which platform suits their needs better
Features and user interface: Lichess and Chess.com in direct comparison
You want to play chess online. There are two major competitors for this: Lichess and Chess.com. Before you choose one of the two platforms, you should take a close look at the various functions and the user interface. Both sites offer a range of tools and resources suitable for both beginners and experienced chess players. When deciding between Lichess and Chess.com, you should consider which features are more important to you: Free to use and simplicity, or access to more comprehensive learning materials and a more visually appealing environment.
- Lichess is completely free and based on an open source approach. All features, including tournaments, training modes and game analysis, are available free of charge.
- Lichess’ simple, ad-free user interface focuses heavily on ease of use and quick access to the game.
- Chess.com, on the other hand, offers a free basic membership as well as paid premium options that allow for advanced training tools and more detailed game analysis.
- The platform is characterized by a wide range of learning resources, including videos, articles and interactive lessons created by grandmasters.
- While Lichess is known for its minimalist design and fast loading times, Chess.com offers a more visually appealing interface with customizable themes and chess boards.
- The Chess.com mobile app is also often praised for its ease of use and functionality.
Player community and competitions: A comparison of the offerings of Lichess and Chess.com
For many chess players, the community and the available competition formats play a decisive role. There are also significant differences between Lichess and Chess.com here.
- Lichess fosters a very open and inclusive community. The platform allows users to start games quickly and easily without the need to register.
- In addition, the available tournaments are freely accessible and include a wide range of time controls.
- Chess.com, on the other hand, has a much larger user base, which makes it possible to play games at any time against opponents with international backgrounds and different levels of play. In addition, Chess.com regularly organizes online tournaments, which often involve well-known chess personalities and often also pay out prize money.
- In terms of social features, Chess.com offers extensive opportunities to create and join clubs and participate in interactive events. Lichess also offers options for social interaction, but these are somewhat more limited in scope and depth.
Teaching materials and resources: A critical look at Lichess and Chess.com
An important criterion for many chess players is the range of learning materials and resources.
- Both platforms support their users in different ways.
- Lichess provides all users with a wide range of training tools free of charge.
- This includes tactical tasks that are updated daily and a training system based on individual skills.
- However, Chess.com could surpass Lichess in the variety of teaching materials.
- A premium membership gives users access to an extensive library of training videos, grandmaster-led courses and personalized training plans. These resources are especially valuable for players looking to improve specific aspects of their game.
Are there differences in the Elo rating of Chess.com and Lichess?
Yes, there are differences in the Elo numbers between chess.com and Lichess. The Elo rating is a rating system that measures the playing strength of chess players. Both platforms use their own versions of the Elo system, but the ratings are not directly comparable and may vary.
- In general, it should be noted that a certain Elo number on one platform does not necessarily correspond to the same playing strength on the other platform. Players can often find that their Elo rating is lower on chess.com than on Lichess, even though they are playing against similar opponents. However, this is normal and is caused by the differences in the rating systems of the two platforms.
