State of Play

Again not many posts but I have a 142 day playing streak on chess.com which means I've been at least one game a day for that length of time. My rating still ranges between 1300 and 1350 but many games have been lost through blunders caused by time pressure. If I can improve my time management, then my average rating should slowly climb.

I've started playing on lichess.org again after a long break. I'd forgotten the platform was completely free and relied on donations, unlike chess.com. I should at least make use of it. My rating on the two platforms is quite different and I asked Gemini why this was the case. Here was my query:

I play online chess on chess.com and my rating hovers around 1350. However, my rating on Lichess is about 1650. What is the reason for the disparity in my rating between these two platforms. Which one more accurately reflects my real level of competency?

My rating graph on Lichess

My rating graph on chess.com

Here was the response:

The 300-point gap between your ratings is completely normal and mathematically expected for your current bracket. The disparity is not a reflection of inconsistent play on your part, but rather the result of differing algorithms, starting baselines, and player demographics.

Reasons for the Disparity

• Starting Baselines: Lichess defaults every new account to a starting rating of 1500. Chess.com, on the other hand, allows new users to self-select their experience level upon account creation, often placing them at much lower starting points like 400, 800, or 1200. Because the baseline on Lichess is significantly higher, the entire bell curve is mathematically shifted upward for beginner and intermediate players.
  
  
• Mathematical Systems: Neither site actually uses the traditional Elo system. Chess.com uses the Glicko-1 rating algorithm, whereas Lichess uses Glicko-2. These systems calculate rating deviations and volatility differently, which naturally results in different numerical outputs.
  
  
• Player Pool Demographics: Chess.com has a massive, highly commercialized reach, attracting a huge volume of absolute beginners and casual players. This creates a dense compression of users at the bottom of the rating ladder. Lichess tends to attract a proportionally higher number of dedicated hobbyists. In the 15|10 rapid time control you play, you are facing different player populations on each site, altering how your relative strength is measured.

The More Accurate Reflection

To answer directly: your Chess.com rating of ~1350 is a much closer numerical reflection of your real-world competency.

While neither platform provides an official FIDE (World Chess Federation) rating, Chess.com's system generally tracks much closer to what a player's actual over-the-board FIDE rating would be. The Lichess rating scale sits hundreds of points higher than FIDE until players reach the master level (around 2200+), at which point the ratings across all platforms finally begin to converge.

It is important to note that your Lichess rating is not "fake" or "wrong." Online ratings do not act as an absolute, universal ruler of chess mastery; they simply measure your relative strength within a closed pool of active players. You are playing the exact same caliber of chess on both sites—the tape measure being used to score you is just calibrated to start at a different number.

One thing I discovered is that I've been mostly playing the London system with White. It's something that I settled upon because it suited my style and I gravitated toward it. Now that I know it's a well established system, I have access to a plethora of YouTube videos that discuss it. I'll be writing more about this system in future videos.

Protection

No posts since January 6th of 2026 but since then I haven't been neglecting my chess. In fact I've played at least one online game a day for 115 days. Figure 1 shows a screenshot from my latest game against a player rated almost 100 points lower than me.

Figure 1: my status

I'm playing with the White pieces and after an exchange-fest of pieces, our positions were relatively equal with my Queen being more centrally placed. Black played d8-d5 and blundered the game. I'm not celebrating my spotting the obvious but it highlights the danger of unguarded pieces. If Black had his f8 Rook on e8, I wouldn't have been able to capture his Rook.

In my own play, I get nervous if one of my pieces is unprotected and I seek to exploit an advantage from any of my opponent's unprotected pieces. With regular play, I'm beginning to avoid leaving any of pieces unprotected. As for my standard of play, I'll have to say it's variable. My usual style of play is to play positionally and avoid any tactical complications. I prefer closed positions to open ones because the latter offer more opportunities for tactical play. This slow, conservative style of play sometimes frustrates my opponents who then make moves that are positionally dubious.

Whenever I depart from this style of play, I usually run into trouble. Occasionally I'll blunder even if closed positions that favour my style of play but this is becoming less frequent. Figure 2 shows the statistics for my last 90 days of play.

Figure 2: my status as of 29th March 2026

Nothing to boast about but at least, compared to my stats from January 6th 2026, I've improved from a win - draw - loss of 47 - 8 - 45 to 50 - 8 - 42. I'm playing daily and I could certainly improve my rating if I studied the openings more deeply. I always open with Nc3 or d2-d4 and play the French Defence against White's e2-e4. A little opening trap in the latter has won me a pawn on more than one occasion. Practice with my selected openings and deeper study of the endgame is the way forward. One thing I've learned is to take my losses more philosophically and to learn from them.

The Benefits of Consistent Play

I've been playing online everyday now for 34 days straight which is certainly a lifetime record. Usually I play two games and today and managed to win both so that my rapid ranking reached 1351 which is the highest it's been for a while. I only play rapid 15 | 10 and Figure 1 shows a summary of my results on chess.com.

Figure 1: my status as of 6th January 2026

Two things have happened recently. The first is that I began not to take my defeats too personally. I committed to playing everyday and reasoned that the more I played the more proficient I would become or at least my play wouldn't get any worse. The second is that I'm rediscovering the style of play that suits me best: safe and positional. By this I mean not opening up the position too much, maintaining a strong defense and patiently maneuvering my pieces into their optimum positions. 

When doing this successfully, I can almost sense the frustration in my opponent as he probes for weaknesses but doesn't find any and can't develop a coherent game plan. Figure 2 shows a position from one of my two games today where it is White's turn to move.

Figure 2: White to move

The position is relatively equal but none of White's attack on the Kingside failed and my position is pretty much locked down. White has been piling up pressure on the c file and trying to break through. With under three minutes on his clock, he rashly plays 27 Rxd5 to which I replied 27 ... Be6 and he resigned. A lot of players don't like this positional, defensive style of play and eventually lash out inadvisedly.

The second game reveals how I often overreach when I should be defensive. Figure 2 shows the position when it is White's 23rd move. Black has a pressure on the f2 square thanks to his Rook and Queen battery. The King and Queen are defending this square but I played 23. Re7 and this was a mistake. Naturally I wanted to place my Rook on the seventh rank but this was too ambitious. I should have played 23. Re2 and further defend the f2 square and prepare to double up on the e file. However, after Black's 23 ... Rd8, he is threatening to penetrate to d2 with his Rook with drastic consequences. I had to retreat with my Rook to guard the d2 square and was on the backfoot a little after this. Fortunately I won and was lucky that I had the luxury of retreating when I needed to.

Figure 2

World Chess Champions

Using a chess notebook that I have set up in Gemini's NotebookLM, I got it to create a timeline of male world champions with photos, country flag and length of reign. See Figure 1.

Figure 1

I asked NotebookLM to create a similar timeline for the women but instead it came up with key milestones for women in chess. See Figure 2.

Figure 2

My notebook has access to 48 sources so there is plenty of scope for more research, summaries etc.

Englund Gambit

Today, on chess.com I played White against the Englund Gambit and swiftly lost. I thought I'd better acquaint myself with this opening in order to avoid future disasters. I asked trusty Gemini the following question:

What is the best response to the Englund Gambit in chess opening theory.

The best response to the Englund Gambit ($1. d4$ $e5$) is to accept the gambit and enter the Main Line Refutation ($4. Bf4$).

This line is objectively the strongest because it allows you to keep the extra pawn while Black's position collapses due to a lack of development and a misplaced Queen.

The Refutation Sequence

Memorize this exact sequence to punish the opening:

$1. d4$ $e5$ (The Englund Gambit)

$2. dxe5$ $Nc6$

$3. Nf3$ $Qe7$ (Black attacks the pawn for the second time)

$4. Bf4!$ (The critical test. You defend the pawn and develop.)
Note: Black will now try their main trick with $4... Qb4+$.
$4... Qb4+$ $5. Bd2$ $Qxb2$ (Black grabs the b2 pawn and attacks the Rook.)
$6. Nc3!$ (This is the winning move. Do not play $6. Bc3??$ which loses immediately to $Bb4$.)

Why This Wins

By playing $6. Nc3$, you defend the Rook on a1 indirectly (if Black takes the Rook, you trap their Queen). You are now threatening to play $Rb1$ to harass the Queen and $Nb5$ to fork Black's King and Rook.

Black is usually forced to retreat or play awkward defensive moves while you have a massive lead in development and an extra center pawn.

The One Trap to Avoid

The only way White loses this position is by playing $6. Bc3??$.

• If you play $6. Bc3$, Black plays $6... Bb4!$, pinning your Bishop. You will lose your piece and the game.

• Remember: Always play the Knight to c3 ($6. Nc3$) to protect your Rook.

Relevant Video

Ending the Englund Gambit | GM Naroditsky

This video is relevant because Grandmaster Naroditsky details the exact $4. Bf4$ refutation and explains the tactical nuances of the $Nc3$ vs $Bc3$ distinction to ensure you convert the advantage.

My addendum: here another video by Remote Chess Academy that deals with the gambit.