10690 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Considering Magnus Carlsen is only 21, and already has a Elo rating of 2800+, is it probable that after 5-10 years he will break the 3000 barrier and become the first human player to do so? That I believe would be a great milestone not only in chess but of human capabilities in general. What does everyone feel about this?
Yes, i believe magnus will break 3000 in a few decades to come since his chess knowledge is on a whole new level to previous players. He was even able to beat Karpov and draw Kasparov when he was 13 and just an IM
yes, but he is overrated, inflation in fide ratings has pushed his rating upwards
Never, 3000 is way too high, Kasparov was 2851 in 1999 and just beating that is tough enough, a great player like Anand never had a single 2900 performance in his career as far as I know.
I think once more players are able to hold ratings of 2800+ we will see 2900's. That still seems to be a ways off though. But certainly someone will one day crack 3000, when there are quite a few 2900's and many 2800's. Not sure we will see it in my lifetime, but the new generation of chess is upon us and growing to be quite strong. We shall see.
Yes...the highest ranked chess player is overrated.
It will take a long time to get enough players over 2800 for anyone to have a chance at 3000, it may be another generation or more.
Consider this: Carlsen just won the Tal Memorial with +2 undefeated over 9 games against strong opposition. He gained an estimated 1.8 rating points. Had he already been 2900, he would have lost 2 points for the same result. As you get higher than the field, you must win nearly every game because draws cost points against nearly every opponent.
There aren't many current candidates to ever get over 2800 who aren't already there (or who haven't been there, like Anand). Kramnik isn't going to get too much higher, although he may stay over 2800 until he retires (which won't be too many years, he has said). So who that we know now has any shot at it?
Karajakin, certainly, and Caruana, both are young enough and high enough. Nakamura has an outside shot, as does Radjabov. Topalov could conceivably regain that status even though he's not shown that he really wants to. Of younger players, Giri could make it eventually, perhaps Nyzhnyk someday.
Even if all of those did, and more group around or above 2750, there won't be many opportunities for the top player to gain points as he approaches 2900. It could take a very long time to get to 2900 even.
You are making an unreasonable prediction. Magnus Carlsen is world class and it's unlikely he'll ever make 2900 much less 3000. The performance requirement for a human just isn't practical. He would have to win constantly, not only to offset huge ELO losses from games he lost, but also to offset draws too. The only way he can reach 3000 without simply winning most of his games is if other players have an ELO of like 2900 as well, if they don't, and most players are still at 2700s then draws would hurt Magnus alot as well. 2800 is extremely good already, so really it doesn't matter in the end
Rating only tells you how good you are compared to others in the pool. It doesn't necessarily reflect how good you are qualitatively.
If you put a strong expert in a pool of beginners, it is probable that the expert may easily break the 3000 rating although the expert's playing standard is only at a master strength at best. This is called rating inflation.
If you put a super GM in a pool of only another strong GMs with no beginners, no masters, nor anybody less than a GM. I am pretty sure that the super GM may not even break the 2000 rating (Let alone the 3000 rating) despite the fact that the super GM plays at a super-human quality. This is called rating deflation.
In fact, Capablanca at his peak (if ELO rating existed at that time) may have reached the 3000 rating. Note this rating does not reflect how good Capa is qualitatively, but rather how good he is compared to others in the pool. Capa went undefeated (lost not a single game) for over 8 years while he was active participating in many strong tournaments.
So will Carlsen break the 3000 barrier? It depends on the pool. If there are more idiots joining FIDE in the coming years, Carlsen as well as others may reach the 3000 mark. If there are more little Carlsens, little Svidlers, and little Anands joining FIDE, then it will be difficult for Magnus Carlsen to reach 3000 (or even maintain his existing rating).
3000 rating is out of bounds for humans to reach; Magnus Carlsen is a chess monster but there will always be other extremely strong competition.
At best predictions he would exceed kasparov's 2851 elo since he goes in undefeated streaks, but his skill is not far superior to 2700s and 2800s to be 200 points stronger than those super GMs.
Hankas is right. A rating is only a number computed based on past performance among a pool of players. The number itself has no intrinsic "meaning" of worth. Everyone seems to suffer from this fetish. So the answer is: who cares??
Kramnik isn't going to get too much higher, although he may stay over 2800 until he retires
Only if he retires today, since he'll be 2799 on the July list. :-)
Capa went undefeated (lost not a single game) for over 8 years while he was active participating in many strong tournaments.
It was only three tournaments, one of them the weak Hastings 1919 with Capa as the only top player. New York the year before wasn't too strong either, with Janowski and Marshall as the highest ranked opponents, and they had passed their peaks already when they lost their title matches badly almost a decade earlier. London 1922 was quite strong though.
He didn't break Kasparov rating yet :)
No, he won't break 3000. Consider the math...
Comparing July 2002 and July 2012 the differences aren't big looking only at the actual numbers. Two 2800 rated players, ten years ago #1 was 2838 and is now 2837, #2 then was 2809 and is now 2816. Going just by that it doesn't look as if the top ratings will get close to 2900 anytime soon.
...what is the term in economics? inflation?
No he won't.
However, with time will come more rating inflation (unless it's addressed) and then someone might. It'll take quite a while though.
A recent game
by Timothy_P a few minutes ago
What happened to the fun???
by FlintLockwood a few minutes ago
5/25/2013 - Pieces Out of Play
by Rameish a few minutes ago
Fritz 13 Questions
by mldavis617 3 minutes ago
5,000 Signs You Don't Know Enough About Chess
by S-Bharadwaj 3 minutes ago
FM Borislav Ivanov Disqualified
by socialista 4 minutes ago
by FelixPlatypus 4 minutes ago
new official FIDE WCC chess set
by Czechman 5 minutes ago
Getting a rating of 2000
by hicetnunc 5 minutes ago
by eagles_metal 9 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com