Chess.com is copying Lichess

Why do you need Swiss tournaments? Who copied whom here? Arena > Swiss, obviously.
@FischyVishy Swiss is a sportive format and its results are relatively fair. Swiss has a mathematical background behind it. Arena was invented just randomly and its results means who played more and who was more lucky in pairings with the exception when there is a clear dominator who came later and cleared the field (in which case Swiss will not give another result of course).

chess.com's interface is just so laggy. It's low level coding work - have you seen penguin playing there vs. here?
I saw penguin playing 1+0 against Nakamura there, I didn't notice serious lags. Though it really seems on lichess you can make an enormous number of moves having a few seconds unlike other sites, that's true.

I PM'ed about the cheating case, because I'm really interested in it.

I mean sure, Swiss is great, but my point is that chess.com copied the Arenas because not many people are playing Swiss tournaments (and not many people enjoy them). This can be confirmed if you ask a few users.

@penguingim1 can confirm himself.

Chess sites that depend on advertising revenue often will have an "Exclusivity Clause" signed by high profile players. Players, coaches, personalities are paid $ to endorse and subscribe to that particular site. Standard practice. Lichess is not bound to advertisers. There is not a demand to meet a quota of "clicks". A major difference in the "model" of what a chess site is all about. Either a service provided for the chess community or a business venture by a few individuals for profit. I think we all know which will be the #1 site before long.

I don't understand why these Lichess fan boys are so intimidated by Chess.com.

If you think it's an inferior site, sure, just say so and move on. I don't understand the need to keep at it and go on and on about it in what is nothing but an echo chamber.

This thread asked a simple question, is Chess.com copying Arena from Lichess. And @FischyVishy jumps in comparing metrics that are totally irrelevant to what was being discussed. Where was the need for it?

Maybe we should make a Chess.com rant thread on here, so that these fan boys can vent out all their frustration daily, hopefully that should stop them from derailing every thread that is about Chess.com. And who knows, it might be entertaining too, maybe I'll start one.

This thread asked a simple question, is Chess.com copying Arena from Lichess.
@emilynow The dumb but absolutely correct answer to this question is "No, because the format is not the same. Lichess doesn't have a progressive combos of wins." But you can guess that the real question is: does Chess.com introduce Arena because of desperation of losing to Lichess or just as an ordinary update? And FischyVishy's post is totally relevant to this formulation of the question. Also it gives some interesting info by itself, as I didn't know that Lichess name is censored on Chess.com.

@FischyVishy I believe that Arena is a better format for bullet tournaments in many senses, so I won't be surprised to hear such an opinion from penguin. For blitz I'm already not so sure, and for more than 5 minutes controls it is plain stupid, and you either play many hours in a row in Weekly+ Classical tournaments to get some fair place among similar addicts, either the whole lot depends on pairings in Hourly Classical.

@mdinnerspace Lichess is so good because it was written by a talented programmer with a lot of enthusiasm. For sure Lichess "model" is more user-friendly, but Chess.com has real money that it can use for multidimensional improvements that'll make it attractive by other features than Lichess. I'd like to believe that in the end the free and open source warrior will beat the money oriented beast in all aspects, but that's not predetermined. [Btw, Linux is still much less popular than Windows as a Desktop OS.]

youtu.be/AyqGwt9lvXs?t=1551

Was watching Nakamura stream on twitch and right there you see him lose on time. And I was thinking it's strange you have a top player playing on a laggy site. And he complains about it several times in his stream.

Lichess makes me feel spoiled. Makes no sense!

What would make me really happy is if he had a better streaming PC, and played on Lichess. Then things would make sense. Cuz he has money, and deserves to play on the best site/interface.

I am convinced the reason chess.com lags so much is due to it's ads. The site is so weird. It's like an app but on your browser. So slow and laggy. I'm not that clued up on programming but from what I've read v2 was better and it's v3 that is causing all the problems.

"I just find it amusing that they're so desperate to stop losing members to Lichess that they're willing to just blatantly copy Lichess. Kind of pathetic to be honest."

Even more pathetic: Lichess makes chess.com cry. I was banned from writing comments there because at a thread about favorites quotes I wrote "lichess is better, but it's free." -- Thibault Duplessis

Chess.com is the world's most ugly website.

and you know since not been hammered by the ads here in the middle of a game or by proxy ,I am inclined to think more people would become donors for the cause over being a member of another site still having to deal with the lagging issue...agreed ad heavy chess.com just sucks for speed chess. they should have stick to chess using telnet loggin into port 500..

People there will pay £80 a year for what? What do you actually get for your money?

1. Unlimited tactics - get them here or chesstempo for free.
2. Lessons - That don't help you improve
3. Videos - This is a good feature but they only allow it for diamond members.
4. Access to databases that you get for free on other sites.

My main problem with chess.com is their tier system of membership. Even if you support the site financially they still restrict your use depending on your membership level. A gold member for example is limited to 25 tactics a day. A platinum member gets unlimited but only 10 lessons a day and no access to videos. The biggest scam though is limiting game analysis. Something that costs chess.com nothing as they use Stockfish.

Any mention of lichess on their site gets deleted immediately. Apparently Eric says mention of the site is ok but comparisons are not allowed. The mods have clearly not got that memo.

I was a diamond member for months. I wish I had found this site sooner. I can't donate too much a month to this site just now but when I can I will definitely be paying more.