n
Proof why Chess.com is better Lichess.org during Analysis
Sort:
Feb 4, 2024
0
#23
Without even reading other comments... I enjoy playing more on lichess but every single game I export to chess.com to analyse. I'm a relative noob fair to say but chessdot analysis tells me what I should have played in a much more visible and intuitive way (at a cost of course) #diamond. Forblw I'll continue to play on lichess then analyse and study on chessdot. #my2cents
Nov 24, 2024
0
#24
You edited it.When I analysed the move lichess says it is a theory move.
The_Arrow_Of_Requiem wrote:
In the first photo ( sorry its blurry ), the move e4 which is Englund Gambit is considered a blunder. And then there is another move which is considered a blunder.
( Sorry for the blurry pic ) This one considers this a blunder. I thought alright, fine. Then I went to chess.com and replayed the moves here in the Analysis and then used Game Report.
Here, e4 is considered a Book Move
And then the next so called blunder d4 is also a book move.
So here's my conclusion -
Lichess engine considers every book move which gives the opponent a bit of an advantage such as -0.9 or -0.8 a blunder and has not been programmed to spot book moves. Meanwhile chess.com engine(s) are programmed to recognise book moves. Why is this bad? Its because if you say that a gambit is a blunder then it would prevent players from playing Gambits like this as this may give them the idea that powerful Gambits like the England Gambit is bad and they may end up underestimating the player who plays this and fall to certain traps.
Overall, it is better to use chess.com analysis and it is easier to use too ( Although you need membership to save it )
When we hear the terms "book move" and "theory" they mostly mean moves that have been recorded in tournament play especially by GMs.
The_Arrow_Of_Requiem wrote:
Man this thing applies to other Gambits too. I played the King's Gambit and my opponent accepted it. There the move " f4 " was inaccurate. I mean like are you trying to say that the inventor of this opening was an idiot who did not know anything? Seriously man, they need to program the computer to recognise the book moves ( Gambits ) and stop it from categorising them to inaccurate moves.
When I analyze tournament games for friends and students, I use ChessBase 16 to search the database for similar games either played in exact move order or through transposition of moves. I also use Houdini 6 to aid me in finding the possibly better moves that could have been played regardless whether the game result was a win, loss or draw.
AunTheKnight wrote:
This makes Lichess’s analysis worse how? Book moves can be blunders. It’s just giving an objective analysis. Plus, most gambits are unsound anyway. The Englund is garbage.
In fact, my club is seriously considering banning certain openings/defences to be played in our tournaments as they are insulting not only to your opponent but to the game of Chess itself. Those who want to play this crap in unrated games might be relagated to play in a separate smaller room at our club.
Can you actually get any comments on anything but opening book or EGTB positions in Lichess anyway? I haven't discovered how.