Source: http://2700chess.com
| # | Name | Rating | +/− |
| 1 | Carlsen | 2834.8 | +8.8 |
| 2 | Aronian | 2808.8 | +6.8 |
| 3 | Kramnik | 2800.6 | +0.6 |
| 4 | Anand | 2798.6 | −12.4 |
| 5 | Radjabov | 2773.2 | −7.8 |
| 6 | Topalov | 2769.7 | +1.7 |
| 7 | Karjakin | 2768.7 | +5.7 |
| 8 | Ivanchuk | 2765.6 | −9.4 |
| 9 | Morozevich | 2762.9 | +0.9 |
| 10 | Grischuk | 2760.9 | +8.9 |
| 11 | Nakamura | 2759.3 | +1.3 |
| 12 | Gashimov | 2750.4 | −6.6 |
| 13 | Mamedyarov | 2747.4 | +14.4 |
| 14 | Svidler | 2745.9 | −9.1 |
| 15 | Tomashevsky | 2740.0 | 0.0 |
| 16 | Gelfand | 2738.5 | −5.5 |
| 17 | Caruana | 2736.0 | +9.0 |
| 18 | Nepomniachtchi | 2735.1 | +5.1 |
| 19 | Wang Hao | 2733.2 | −2.8 |
| 20 | Kamsky | 2732.0 | 0.0 |
| 21 | Dominguez | 2729.9 | +17.9 |
| 22 | Jakovenko | 2729.0 | 0.0 |
| 23 | Vitiugov | 2726.4 | −2.6 |
| 24 | Ponomariov | 2724.5 | +1.5 |
| 25 | Navara | 2720.8 | −3.2 |
| 26 | Leko | 2720.0 | 0.0 |
| 27 | Almasi | 2715.3 | +8.3 |
| 28 | Adams | 2715.1 | −18.9 |
| 29 | Giri | 2714.1 | +0.1 |
| 30 | Le Quang Liem | 2714.0 | 0.0 |
| 31 | Polgar, Judit | 2710.0 | 0.0 |
| 32 | Riazantsev | 2710.0 | 0.0 |
| 33 | Wojtaszek | 2708.5 | +3.5 |
| 34 | Shirov | 2706.6 | +1.6 |
| 35 | Moiseenko | 2705.8 | −9.2 |
| 36 | Vallejo | 2705.2 | +0.2 |
| 37 | Malakhov | 2705.0 | 0.0 |
| 38 | Jobava | 2703.9 | +25.9 |
| 39 | Sutovsky | 2703.3 | +7.3 |
| 40 | Naiditsch | 2701.1 | −10.9 |
| 41 | Sasikiran | 2700.0 | +11.0 |
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
This is a farce. Nakamura should be #1. They just don’t like American players. It’s all political.
That’s right! I was thinking that myself. All those damn calculations are political, driven by obviously biased anti-american algoriths. You can get statistics to prove anything, right? I am sure Kirsan would fix it if he wasn’t so much needed to push through his chess-in-the-olympics agenda. Once that gets settled, he is going to straighten out this mess.
In fact, the right algorithm would be like this:
if ( name = naka )
{ reduce elo by 50
}
// naka playing strength should be
// increased atleast by 50 due to
// Great Gary’s help… so reduce
// by 50 this year.. 100 for next..
Naka #1? for what? getting slapped by Magnus 5 times in a row.. I can play Magnus 5 times with the same result – w/o Gary’s help
Naka #1? you guys must be dreaming…
Come on you guys are stupid. Two people said Nakamura is number 1. That makes 1 and 1. In other words 11. And he is number 11. What are you getting on their case for? They are right!
You have proven your anti-American bias. You are probably one of those European peoples.
Naka is the one who did not like the US championship..oh i forgot.. he is preparing for WC… did Gelfand change his name to nakamura? LOL
Looking at Kramnik when he was World Champion, and now Anand, it would appear that match play makes people play defensive, perhaps less risk taking. Anand played daring moves in the tournament-style world championship, e.g, against Moro.
Tennis, on the other hand, has no such old fashioned world champion concept. Why have it in Chess? Just have tournaments, and a live rating list!
Ratings are just that, ratings. Unless Carlsen becomes World Champion, having a rating of 2838, or 2900 for that matter, would mean very little in chess history. And to become World Champion, he HAS to participate in the World Championship cycle.
It seems to me that this doesn’t include London. Aronian should be going down, and Kramnik and Nakamura will go up more than has been indicated here. Is this right?
Oh, and the first poster was… ahem… clearly Joking.
Brad H.
To anon – ” ratings are just that ratings’… Well said. I entirely agree with you.