General comparison question

What's the average opinon of Chess.com compared to Chess Manic or other play sites?  I'm asking since this is my first day here and I've played only for about a month with on-line play.  Since I was a teenager otherwise with the real sets.

The graphics for the board and pieces seem comparable to Chess Manics.  It's the info layout that's different.  Anyway, that's the first thing I notice.

Derek Jolly

worlds better :)

make sure you try:

www.chess.com/tactics

www.chess.com/livechess

check out www.chess.com/sitemap.html to see everything!

Well ok, why do you say that?

Derek J.

What happened to spell check? My spelling sucks as bad as my chess.

I suspect they must have quit teaching spelling in school completely ?  I recall we had spelling until high school but even in high school many teachers would mark off for bad spelling as well, especially in English class.

Spelling bees would be so much more interesting if chessplayer surnames were admissible. I'd love to see them spell: Nimzowitsch, Znosko-Borovsky, Bourdonnais, Konstantinopolsky, etc.

Ok, I wanted to get some feedback, but I can figure it out for myself without it I suppose.

Why did these guys start talking about spelling bees and spell check?

Derek J.

OK I'm going to start answering my own question now.  At least with what I consider to be more important.  The chessmen and boards seem to be a little sharper here.  Not all of them but with the ones I find the best for use.  The conditional move button, the analysis board,  the hours counter, are all here (or just better) and not on Chess Maniac.  There is a lot of good easy to get to info on CM.  It's just laid out differently.  There are seemingly about x3 times more players being counted on-line.  It's quite a lot more.  I know there is a lot of chess article info here, and that kind of thing, but it's a matter of what I get for the same cost.  It's more here so close to the same cost.  Frankly, As far as articles go, that's fine enough, but I'm just as well reading books, so it's purely supplemental.  So far I'm prefering it here, even though it's a little more compicated to use and more distracting.  CM is more basic with the chess game and info.  There's something to be said for that.  It's also a very cool site.

Derek Jolly

P.S.  I just realized how dull I am today of all days.  What do you do when you're on your own on a holiday?  Well there are extra reasons today anyway, like having a missing car.

I've convinced myself this is a preferable site to CM.  All of the background stuff adds up, especially the drill problem stuff, and the 1-3 move puzzles. It's a little more info laid out to get used to but it's OK when one get's over the newness change.  More players counts for a lot too.  Fairly amazing how many people are on here.  Something like two million I think. I'm recomending this site to people I know, including guys I play with in real places with real sets.  For me I have to have, I was just explaining this to someone today, real sets and games in the real 3D-world.  Too much artifical makes me uneasy.  Nevertheless, I get a lot more play with the computer here or elsewhere, and it's meaningful.  I guess for some it's a reverse situation;  Computers and artifical being the norm for chess, not the other way around.  I could't imagine not playing for real, or not having an actual chess set to use.  I think it's possible to be too wired-in to things, but that's beyond the scope of what I needed to say here.

Derek M. Jolly

Derek: does the head honcho of CM greet newcomers personally - as you get sometimes get here on chess.com (from Erik)?

If you want puzzles, there are puzzles, If you want game analysis, there's that as well. There's humour, acrimony and desperation - a bit of everything. Behind the scenes, there's blood and toil and goodness knows what to keep improving the facilities.

Actually the head guy there is running for the Vermont Govenorship.  He's an interesting guy with some strong pro-gun, anti-tax, libertarian views.  I've heard back from him, but not the way you meant. 

I note the differences, that I'm aware of, or become aware of.  I'm appreciating Chess.com more and more. But I'm not wild about the name.  Sounds like a funky corporation or something fly-by-night.  Something catchy would of been better to a "com" type name.  Very unimaginative to me.

D.J.

Something like chess.bored?