Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Bloated FIDE Ratings of the Elite


  • 4 years ago · Quote · #2

    Ian_Sinclair

    I disagree with you Reb. I think they are just having bad tournaments. I'm sure you have had some where you played below ur standard.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #4

    heinzie

    It's so easy to heckle the top guys in any sport after they "lost" a game. I don't care that their ratings are supposedly inflated. I care that they are able to come up with awe-inspiring chess moves each time they sit down. They're the best for a good reason... even if they don't win every single game. They're the most skilled, dedicated and experienced bunch of players in the world. It's not like we have something better to offer. Give them dudes a break!

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #5

    -waller-

    Seems like Anand IS giving himself a break.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #6

    Shakaali

    I don't know the reason but money issues might also explain the missing of Anand. These top guys are pros and they don't play for free...

    Apart from the one game (which he won) Kramink has been playing against top class opponents and his performance rating on the official site is only 26 points below his actual rating. So this is hardly that bad considering that the team has also won every match in which he participated thus far - after all the olympics are team competition where individual results are supposed to have secondary importance.

    Carlsen and Topalov play against more mixed opposition but for example Carlsen's losses came against top class GMs (Jobava and Adams) with black.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #7

    TwoMove

    Some element might be they are not so used to taking risks with black. For example Karpov in 70's when need to win against weaker players play a lot Taimanov Sicilian. As he rose to top gradually evolved to playing mostly Petroff's and Caro Kann because draw was good enough against other elite players.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #8

    Ian_Sinclair

    Have you seen Carlsens rise to the top yet? Don't you think he had to get past players lower then 2700 to get to where he could play past that point? No offense Reb mate, but i think you are way off by a long shot on this one.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #9

    Conflagration_Planet

    Ian_Sinclair wrote:

    Have you seen Carlsens rise to the top yet? Don't you think he had to get past players lower then 2700 to get to where he could play past that point? No offense Reb mate, but i think you are way off by a long shot on this one.


    This isn't the only one. 

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #10

    Ian_Sinclair

    Yes i know that mate. Like i said dont mean the 2600 players are a match for the top 30 players. Just because they are having a bad one.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #11

    pathfinder416

    Topalov's loss was to Mark Bluvshtein, a young GM who doesn't live in Europe and consequently doesn't play often against top-flight competition. It's not a stretch to suspect he's under-rated.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #12

    pathfinder416

    Also -- play out that game, it's worth seeing how Bluvshtein won.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #13

    RainbowRising

    heinzie wrote:

    They're the best for a good reason... even if they don't win every single game. They're the most skilled, dedicated and experienced bunch of players in the world. 


    Magnus Carlson is experienced? The guy only just found out how to use his own equipment! 

    Reb could be making a valid point, but he needs some examples of big tournaments that the big players missed.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #14

    trigs

    personally, i wouldn't mind if FIDE had more of a 'season' of matches/tournaments each year, and the top players had to play in so many of them (including some open tournaments) or else they would not be able to be listed in the top rankings.

    more specifically, you have to qualify (possibly for your ratings group) by playing in at least x amount of tournaments per year (some open, maybe even some themed). if a player does not compete in enough tournaments, their rating doesn't change (obviously), but it pretty much has an asterisk next to it and their name is not included in the overall rankings since they did not meet the qualifications.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #15

    heinzie

    Who is Magnus Carlson

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #16

    pathfinder416

    heinzie wrote:

    Who is Magnus Carlson


    He's that kid modelling in the silly clothing ads. I've heard he moonlights at chess too.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #17

    nimzo5

    NM reb- I think with Carlsen at least, you have to factor that he isn't actually playing his repertoire. Look at his win vs Vallejo Pons - just simple chess. I am not sure what he was going for with Adams but this experiment with nh5 is almost certainly not part of what he intends to play in a top level tournament.

    The reality is that several of the top players are holding back their opening ideas and it ends up costing them. Still I would rather have them there representing than like Anand.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #18

    NickYoung5

    I agree with Reb:

    (1) Some of the top players are not playing their rating. Look at Kramnik's miserable performance in Shanghai. Difficult to judge too much from Carlsen as he's been busy beating up lower rated opponents. Topalov and Anand have been MIA since the world championships

    (2) Matchplay ratings are a lot less meaningful than tournament ratings yet they get equal weight. Gelfand beat Leko comprehensively in their Hungarian match. It's doubtful he would have such a high score against a selection of 2700+ GMs.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #20

    nimzo5

    NickYoung5 wrote:

    I agree with Reb:

    (1) Some of the top players are not playing their rating. Look at Kramnik's miserable performance in Shanghai. Difficult to judge too much from Carlsen as he's been busy beating up lower rated opponents. Topalov and Anand have been MIA since the world championships

    (2) Matchplay ratings are a lot less meaningful than tournament ratings yet they get equal weight. Gelfand beat Leko comprehensively in their Hungarian match. It's doubtful he would have such a high score against a selection of 2700+ GMs.


     I agree on Kramnik- but Gelfand has been stringing together great results leading back to the 2009 World Cup.

    I look at Adams performance in non elite tournaments - the chicago open this year, the British champ. and it seems to me his rating is accurate.

    Likewise Vallejo Pons played in the world open and came out with nearly a 2800 performance rating. Doesn't seem like his Fide is overly inflated.

    So if their ratings are accurate, wouldn't Carlsen, Topalov etc be roughly 100 pts stronger?


Back to Top

Post your reply: