lichess.org
Donate

Differences in ratings???

@Chessisthebest2000 How should that work?
Imagine FIDE decided to decrease all Elos by 200, would Magnus still reach 2800? No he wouldn't because all his opponents would be lower rated too even though they haven't magically become weaker.
"I'm not sure if we're allowed to use links but imagine *nameofgame*.com..."

We have freedom of speech here. You can use links and you can encourage people to play chess somewhere else instead of here.

Some chess websites have no freedom of speech. For example at chess.com if the word "lichess" is mentioned it will be deleted and the person would never be able to write comments there again. They fear lichess because it's better and it's free.
@felipe1749

"Chess.com policy is that we do not make these sort of explicit comparisons with our competitors in our forums: I am therefore locking this thread."

Thanks for that link. Chess.com loves censorship. It's like North Korea.
@BobC Comparing that site to North Korea makes light of the actual oppression that happens in North Korea. And people don't sign a Terms of Service right after they're born to live there.

@NoLuckOnlySkill That doesn't make sense. The OP stated he has a lower rating on chess.com, meaning if you were to ignore that absolute ratings don't make sense, that would indicate that chess.com has better players. But absolute ratings don't make sense, the difference is ratings between the two sites is not meaningful.
I guess a somewhat appropriate analogy would be East versus West Germany.
"And people don't sign a Terms of Service right after they're born to live there."
And people don't sign a Terms of Service at lichess. That's one of the differences between lichess which respects freedom of speech and chess.com which suppresses freedom of speech.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.