In 2000, the average rating of the top 100 players in the world was 2644. Today the average is 2684! That is a whopping 40 points increase! Is this caused by rating inflation or do players get that much better?
Top 100 Players January 2009 – 2684
Top 100 Players October 2008 – 2682
Top 100 Players July 2008 – 2679
Top 100 Players April 2008 – 2677
Top 100 Players January 2008 – 2675
Top 100 Players October 2007 – 2672
Top 100 Players July 2007 – 2671
Top 100 Players April 2007 – 2669
Top 100 Players January 2007 – 2666
Top 100 Players October 2006 – 2666
Top 100 Players July 2006 – 2665
Top 100 Players April 2006 – 2664
Top 100 Players January 2006 – 2664
Top 100 Players October 2005 – 2663
Top 100 Players July 2005 – 2662
Top 100 Players April 2005 – 2661
Top 100 Players January 2005 – 2658
Top 100 Players October 2004 – 2657
Top 100 Players July 2004 – 2658
Top 100 Players April 2004 – 2656
Top 100 Players January 2004 – 2654
Top 100 Players October 2003 – 2654
Top 100 Players July 2003 – 2653
Top 100 Players April 2003 – 2651
Top 100 Players January 2003 – 2650
Top 100 Players October 2002 – 2649
Top 100 Players July 2002 – 2649
Top 100 Players April 2002 – 2645
Top 100 Players January 2002 – 2645
Top 100 Players October 2001 – 2646
Top 100 Players July 2001 – 2645
Top 100 Players April 2001 – 2646
Top 100 Players January 2001 – 2647
Top 100 Players October 2000 – 2644
Top 100 Players July 2000 – 2644
www.fide.com
It’s the orange juice.
It’s the shoes!
They are better
There are just more people with rating in every rating group, including the 2600-2700s. If you could measure the 100 “worst” players, you probably would find that the average ratings has gone down.
With the continous globalization of the game thru internet, its just a lot of supertalents joining the competition.
For me the increase is real and not just inflation…
Of course the average ratings are higher. There are just more and more world class players. The times when one or two stood head and shoulders above everyone else are long over.
How about measuring the average of the top 1% of all rated players. Gimme some stat about that, and we’ll see if there’s something interesting here!
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think an inflationary pressure is that people who think they’ve peaked in ELO terms can stop playing, without impact on their ELO rating.
In one way of ocunting, they stay ‘in the system’ though they have in fact left it.
I think not inflation but computer assisted chess preparation has lead to the increase in average…
Chess level is simply higher
As Fischer found out Chess does not stand still.
It’s the machine.
“In one way of ocunting, they stay ‘in the system’ though they have in fact left it.”
Yeah, I am sure you are good at o-cunting Mr. Laffy-man.
Get back on yer bicycle and go o-cunt yourself, Brian.
There are more people paying chess now than 8 years ago, with emerging countries such as China and India. There are more chess tournaments all year round for chess players to participate, to improve their performance and thus rating.
There are more people playing chess now than 8 years ago with emerging countries such as China and India. There are more tournaments for chess players to participate all year round, to improve their performance and thus rating.
There are more people playing chess now than 8 years ago with emerging countries such as China and India. There are more tournaments for chess players to participate all year round, to improve their performance and thus rating.
Any slight mathematically demonstrable inflation is more than compensated for by the general continuous rise in standards; viz: inflation may account for eg a 2200 becoming 2220 after 10 years,but in reality the level which the 2200 was playing at 10 years ago may only equate to a 2140 rating today.(GM Arkell)