Wang Hao has taken over the #1 spot in China. Here is the latest LIVE rating list.
| Rank | Name | Rating | Change | # games |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Carlsen | 2812,0 | +10 | 10 |
| 02 | Anand | 2808,4 | +4,4 | 10 |
| 03 | Aronian | 2805,1 | +4,1 | 9 |
| 04 | Kramnik | 2786,2 | -4,8 | 9 |
| 05 | Topalov | 2774,8 | -11,2 | 10 |
| 06 | Grischuk | 2774,1 | +3,1 | 9 |
| 07 | Mamedyarov | 2772,2 | +9,2 | 9 |
| 08 | Karjakin | 2769,5 | +9,5 | 9 |
| 09 | Ivanchuk | 2764,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 | Nakamura | 2748,2 | +7,2 | 9 |
| 11 | Ponomariov | 2744,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | Radjabov | 2744,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 13 | Wang Hao | 2738,3 | +11,3 | 20 |
| 14 | Gashimov | 2736,0 | +3 | 10 |
| 15 | Wang Yue | 2733,6 | -22,4 | 21 |
| 16 | Gelfand | 2733,2 | -7,8 | 9 |
| 17 | Adams | 2728,0 | +5 | 5 |
| 18 | Jakovenko | 2726,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | Kamsky | 2726,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | Wojtaszek | 2725,7 | -0,3 | 5 |
| 21 | Bacrot | 2724,5 | +9,5 | 12 |
| 22 | Eljanov | 2724,2 | -17,8 | 9 |
| 23 | Shirov | 2722,3 | -12,7 | 15 |
| 24 | Svidler | 2721,5 | -0,5 | 5 |
| 25 | Movsesian | 2720,1 | -0,9 | 4 |
| 26 | Nepomniachtchi | 2720,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | Almasi | 2719,0 | -2 | 10 |
| 28 | Leko | 2717,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | Dominguez | 2716,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | Malakhov | 2715,1 | +3,1 | 3 |
| 31 | Vachier-Lagrave | 2712,9 | +9,9 | 8 |
| 32 | Caruana | 2712,6 | +3,6 | 12 |
| 33 | Jobava | 2707,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | Fressinet | 2704,9 | -4,1 | 12 |
| 35 | Vitiugov | 2704,3 | -4,7 | 2 |
| 36 | Vallejo | 2704,2 | +6,2 | 2 |
| 37 | Alekseev | 2701,0 | 0 | 0 |
| 38 | Morozevich | 2700,0 | 0 | 0 |
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Hello Susan, I just wanted to make clear, that this is not the first time that GM Hao Wang did overtake GM Yue Wang in the World Ranking List. This already did happen the first time some month ago. So it’s not really “New” 🙂 But it’s nice to see that People from all over the World more and more take notice about Chess in China.
maybe thats why new was put down as “new” to indicate that its not the first time GM Hao Wang had been on top?
you can be sure about, it was not ment as per your guess 🙂 If so, then it would have been at least mentioned in her article (as an author duty), that this is not really the first time. After she already told me that she knew about this, I more think new was put down as “new” because most chess players have never before noticed the name Hao Wang before, so it might be a new name to most chess fans (which are nowadays devided in “like Magnus” and “like Magnus a lot”). Maybe new was put down as “new” because most chess players dont even know the name of the “old” Chinese number one. Maybe, maybe…