Hot answers tagged

41

No. The vast majority of club level players still play like the vast majority of club level players always did. Changes in knowledge about chess mostly apply to high levels of play; the kind of mistakes class A players make were already known to be mistakes for ages, and opening theory doesn't help much if your opponent deviates from theory at move 5 anyway. ...


34

The website 2700chess.com has a database with the FIDE ratings (from May 1st, 2019). Their search form only offers the option to show the top 50 or 100 players satisfying the search results, but it's possible to modify the submit request and ask for the top 5000 instead. When I do that, I get 808 results: So the other 700 must have ratings lower than 2500 ...


32

"PhishMaster's Complete Guide To Improvement": What to study, and how. Every player has times where they "plateau", and have trouble moving on, but they usually get past it eventually if they are continuing to study. Sometimes, it is a matter of patience. Here is a set of comprehensive answers to questions I previously gave in various chunks, that are now ...


25

I went through the list of LiChess classical top 200 players and collected the FIDE ratings of LiChess classical ratings of anyone who I could verify on FIDE's website as actually having a FIDE rating: LiChess FIDE LiChess username Name 2585 2265 ClassyPlays Thibault Dudognon [FM] 2389 1869 nikkon2006 Nikita Konstantinov ...


25

I think they certainly have increased their ELO, but more importantly, their overall chess strength. ELO is only a rating relative to others in the pool so it may tend to go up more slowly if everyone in the pool gets better, which they have collectively. First, you need to take an average of the top players, rather than look at just two incredibly special ...


21

No difference whatsoever. As with tournament results, ELO (or Glicko, or any other chess rating system) counts all losses the same, all draws the same, and all wins the same. Doesn't matter if you lose on time, resign, or get mated on the board --- nor whether it took 12 moves or 120. Likewise a draw is a draw, whether by agreement, repetition, stalemate (...


20

Gaining 400 points in a single year is not a reasonable goal for an adult playing at 1600. To do this, you will need to be +25 against your peers, where a peer is someone with the rating you have at the time the game is played. That being said, if you're going to try it, the first step is to get an instructor. Your instructor will be able to identify the ...


20

Most chess sites use some variant of the Elo rating system If you have a much higher rating than your opponent, the expectation is that you will win. So if you do win, then we haven't gained that much information, so the change in rating for both you and your opponent will be small. If your opponent wins, there will be a much larger change in rating as ...


20

Between most players, Elo ratings are zero-sum. The formula for updating an Elo rating looks like this. Suppose player 1 and player 2 are playing a game. First, their ratings are used to generate a prediction: an expected score W that player 1 will get against player 2. Then, we compare this to the actual score, X. player 1 will get K*(X-W) points, where K ...


19

I am surprised that the paper "Intrinsic Chess Ratings" by Ken Regan and Guy Haworth hasn't been posted yet. It is exactly what's asked for, serious research into rating inflation. PDF Basically they got games from three periods (1976-1979, 1991-1994, 2006-2009), in several rating ranges (e.g. both players within 10 points of 2200, within 10 points of 2300, ...


19

ELO is not an absolute measurement; it is only meaningful relevant to the ELOs of other players. This is because it is only calculated based on performance against other rated players. The "Maximum ELO", which seems to be what you're looking for, is therefore equal to the ELO of a player at such a time when his ELO is so high that he cannot gain any ELO ...


19

Fide has a rule saying that if one player is rated more than 400 points higher than his opponent, their difference should be set to 400 when calculating rating gain/loss. That means no matter how weak the opposition is, a GM (or anyone) will receive minimum 0.8 rating points for winning. What is the reason behind this? This is an historical anomaly. ...


19

How would say a 1700 rated player of say 50 years ago who is no longer .around go against a 1700 player of today? Speaking as a player who was around 50 years ago and was rated the equivalent of 1800 in 1973 (my BCF grading was 150 with a generally accepted conversion formula of ELO = BCF x 8 + 600) and is rated 1718 today I'm pretty sure I would beat my 17 ...


18

I took the following data from the September 2013 Golden Database1 and "active" players are players with a USCF membership expiration date later than January 1, 20132. All ratings are regular ratings. Note that players have an established rating after completing 25 games. USCF Active Players Established Ratings 46,574 Players 1315.99 Mean Rating 1390 ...


18

The Site ratings at slow time controls can be quite reliable for servers where strong players congregate (ICC, FICS to name a few) as the ratings VERY closely reflect your true playing strength if you've played enough games. For very standardized rating systems such as USCF and FIDE/ELO, you will notice that the different rating classes tend to point to the ...


18

There are actually three different distinctions in the USCF system that have to do with a 2200 rating. First is the National Master title. It is awarded to anyone who has ever had an established (not provisional) rating of over 2200. Once a player is a National Master, they have the title for life no matter what happens to their rating. The NM title has no ...


17

The rating system already kind of allows you to calculate this since you can convert any rating difference into an expected score using the formula: expected = 1/(1 + 10^(diff/400)) so a rating difference of 382 points should give you the .9 expected score. Therefore Magnus Carlsen at 2872 should score 90% (which could be 9 wins and one loss out of 10 ...


16

The engine alone is just one factor; the number of CPU's used, memory, etc. makes the engine stronger. The same engine on an Intel 286 will not be nearly as strong as on the Cray Titan supercomputer, for example. Also, the number of cores makes a difference too. For example, Houdini 3 can take advantage of 32 cores if available. But from the list below, ...


16

I think you best shot is to play 200 rated games of G/60 or longer this year and seriously analyzed each game (like imagine if you analyzed each game for 1 hour plus, tried to find similar high level games, tried to find as many different plans in the position, etc) in addition to doing regular tactical exercises on chess.com trainer or some other good site (...


15

The question is apparently based on a misunderstanding of how ELO ratings work. There is absolutely no mechanism by which the overall increase in players' strength would lead to increase in their ELO. The actual value of the ELO rating bears no meaning; nor does the comparison of ELO at distant times. The only thing that has direct relevance is the ...


15

The Elo rating system is a rating system for two-person, zero-sum games based on the assumption that performance is normally distributed. That is, a player's performance is expected to follow a normal distribution. For FIDE the mean = the player's rating and standard deviation = 2000/7 = 285.7. It was developed by Arpad Elo and first implemented by the ...


15

A typical way to do it is to treat puzzles the same as players and rate them based on whether they "win/lose" and the rating of the "opponent" ChessTempo has a nice explanation here copied below: The rating system is inspired by an idea implemented at the Chess Tactics Server. CTS treats both problem solvers and the problems as opponents with their ...


14

The best thing to train is (almost) always calculation: Get a set of maybe 1000 3-5 move combinations and go through those problems until you basically know them by heart. That's to enable pattern recognition. Apart from that set, concentrate on calculating long variations in your training instead of just seeing tactical shots. The Yusupov books are a good ...


14

The WCC was the "World Chess Council". It was formed in 1998 by Kasparov after the collapse of the PCA (Professional Chess Association) in 1995. It was Kasparov's fourth attempt at an organization separate from FIDE. It organized the candidates match between Kramnik and Shirov in 1998, which Shirov surprisingly won (5.5-3.5), and he was slated to play ...


13

I don't think that there is a significant difference at that level. The main difference with chess 20 years ago is the use of computers and they are not extensively used by club players. Also the advances in opening theory have been profited mostly by the top players (a club player normally doesn't know a lot of theory and doesn't memorize a lot of moves ...


13

This can't be true. I (rated ~1900) expect to score 100% against a 1000 player. I don't think a 1980 rated user is able to score 200% against the same opposition. In table 8.1b in the FIDE rating regulations, you'll find the expected scores corresponding to a rating difference. A rating difference of 80 corresponds to an expected score of 0.61, which is ...


13

Everybody seems to agree that "ELO inflation" is real (I found an article from 20 years ago claiming this exists)...except scientists. Here is a 2011 paper that vehemently denies the phenomenon; the abstract says that only little inflation happens, and the players really get better. https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/7951


12

Movies like to present "chess hustlers" as playing chess for a living. In reality, most of these people are playing chess for fun. The "hustlers" are often just down on their luck financially and like to make some money while still having fun. There's certainly no J.J. Peachum-type figure who trains chess players to go into parks and make money from ...


12

This answer addresses one concrete portion of the OP; namely, for an arbitrary N > 0, what rating difference between Player A and Player B corresponds to Player A's expected score against Player B being N times the expected score for Player B? I'll speak in terms of the USCF's Elo rating system, since I'm most familiar with it. If Player A's expected ...


12

Coincidentally I already answered exactly this question in response to a similar question. Edit: This similar question was about frequencies of blunders in games, which made the analysis somewhat misleading when directly applied to this question. Originally I looked for blunders from equal positions per game move, which made the results a bit confusing ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible