Why correspondence chess has no table in the general ranking page?
lichess.org/player
lichess.org/player
High chance of cheating
Maybe cheating is easier in correspondence chess, but cheaters get caught anyway, so is that a good reason? Moreover, I'm not sure chance of cheating are so higher than in classical chess.
You can cheat at the bullet and hardly got caught, let's not talk about correspondence chess.Also official correspondence championships are allowing engines since two decades.
And since the opening book is allowed (I wonder how many people use it though) it doesn't really feel like true competitive chess to me but rather something to play just for fun.
#4 Using engines in correspondence games on Lichess is prohibited, and it seems Lichess has an efficient system to catch cheaters.
#5 We do use opening books, since there are allowed. If both players are OK with that and it's clearly allowed in Lichess correspondence rules – what's the problem? And if you feel correspondence chess is not competitive enough for you, I can understand that but it's only your opinion, and I don't share it.
#5 We do use opening books, since there are allowed. If both players are OK with that and it's clearly allowed in Lichess correspondence rules – what's the problem? And if you feel correspondence chess is not competitive enough for you, I can understand that but it's only your opinion, and I don't share it.
All cheaters got caught because they become too greedy or lazy.Someone dedicated enough will beat any system.
I don't know why the devs decided not to implement a general ranking table for correspondence players, but I know they didn't just forget it. They must have their reason.
If it's all about cheating, then I'm not sure it's a good reason. Cheaters are everywhere, but certainly not among the best players (they are among the first to be watched).
This is the forum's "Feedback" trend, so I kindly ask the devs to reconsider that point and implement a ranking for correspondence players. It's not so important, but it's probably easy to do and as a correspondence player I think it would be nice for us to be considered as normal lichess player.
Thank you all and good games :)
If it's all about cheating, then I'm not sure it's a good reason. Cheaters are everywhere, but certainly not among the best players (they are among the first to be watched).
This is the forum's "Feedback" trend, so I kindly ask the devs to reconsider that point and implement a ranking for correspondence players. It's not so important, but it's probably easy to do and as a correspondence player I think it would be nice for us to be considered as normal lichess player.
Thank you all and good games :)
I discovered that page by chance:
lichess.org/player/top/200/correspondence
So it appears there's actually a ranking for correspondence chess as well – but it's a bit hidden. I still wonder why it's not displayed in the general ranking page… But it's OK, life is full of mysteries :D
lichess.org/player/top/200/correspondence
So it appears there's actually a ranking for correspondence chess as well – but it's a bit hidden. I still wonder why it's not displayed in the general ranking page… But it's OK, life is full of mysteries :D
imho there's not much interest either by lichess itself or the community, in correspondence chess. most people are into bullet or blitz... or variants. i guess that's wehre the developers of lichess have put their energy into. for correspondence you gotta go to chess.com
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.