Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Who Tops the July 1 FIDE Rating Lists for Classical, Rapid & Blitz?

  • PeterDoggers
  • on 7/3/14, 3:44 AM.

Magnus Carlsen still has a whopping 72-point lead in the world rankings. In the July 1 FIDE rating list, the triple world champion is rated 2877 for standard chess, and is followed by Levon Aronian (Armenia, 2805) and Alexander Grischuk (Russia, 2795). The World Rapid & Blitz Championships were held recently, and so it's also interesting to look at these lists. Carlsen also tops the blitz, but had to allow Fabiana Caruana of Italy to take the lead in the rapid.

Carlsen, in fact, lost rating points compared to the previous list for standard chess: he went back from 2881 to 2877. However, since Aronian lost even more (ten points), the difference between the two increased by six points. Grischuk won three points and cemented his number-three position. All this happened in the Norway Chess tournament last month.

Viswanathan Anand of India didn't play rated games, and as a result he dropped from #5 to #7 because U.S. Grandmaster Hikaru Nakamura and Russian Grandmaster Sergey Karjakin gained considerably (12 and 15 points respectively). Vladimir Kramnik of Russia lost 6 points and dropped from #6 to #8.

Dmitry Jakovenko of Russia won 11 points, and made a big jump: from #21 to #15. Radek Wojtaszek of Poland went from #33 to #22 after gaining 18 points.

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Standard | Top 25

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2877 9 1990
2 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2805 9 1982
3 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2795 9 1983
4 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2789 9 1992
5 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2787 4 1987
6 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2786 9 1990
7 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2785 0 1969
8 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2777 9 1975
9 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2772 9 1975
10 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2766 9 1990
11 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2760 0 1983
12 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2753 0 1968
13 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2751 9 1976
14 Giri, Anish g NED 2750 9 1994
15 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2747 13 1983
16 So, Wesley g PHI 2744 0 1993
17 Adams, Michael g ENG 2743 0 1971
18 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2743 0 1985
19 Vitiugov, Nikita g RUS 2742 0 1987
20 Leko, Peter g HUN 2737 0 1979
21 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2735 3 1969
22 Wojtaszek, Radoslaw g POL 2733 16 1987
23 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2731 0 1977
24 Wang, Hao g CHN 2730 2 1989
25 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2730 0 1990

(Top 100 here)

Two weeks ago the World Rapid and Blitz Championships were held in Dubai -- you can't have missed that. Since almost all of the world's best players were present (from the standard top 10, only Vladimir Kramnik and Veselin Topalov were not) this tournament had a big impact on the lists for rapid & blitz.

The rapid list is in fact the only one where Carlsen doesn't occupy first place. Although he won the rapid tournament in Dubai, Caruana came second with only half a point less. As a result, the Italian went from 2840 to 2858, while Carlsen went from 2827 to 2855.

phpzb4sQj.jpeg
Fabiano Caruana is the world #1 rapid player

Nakamura, who was the number one in the previous list, dropped to 8th place as he finished shared 24th and lost 41 points. Grischuk was third and still is, while Aronian jumped from #9 to #4. Anand was #15 and is now #6.

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Rapid | Top 25

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Caruana, Fabiano g ITA 2858 15 1992
2 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2855 15 1990
3 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2828 15 1983
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2813 15 1982
5 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2811 0 1969
6 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2809 15 1969
7 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2806 15 1990
8 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2800 15 1987
9 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2793 15 1976
10 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2776 15 1987
11 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2773 15 1977
12 Andreikin, Dmitry g RUS 2773 0 1990
13 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2773 0 1975
14 Leko, Peter g HUN 2773 0 1979
15 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2772 0 1975
16 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2771 15 1990
17 Wang, Yue g CHN 2765 0 1987
18 Adams, Michael g ENG 2764 0 1971
19 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2763 0 1983
20 Tomashevsky, Evgeny g RUS 2752 15 1987
21 Le, Quang Liem g VIE 2740 20 1991
22 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2739 15 1985
23 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2738 0 1983
24 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2731 15 1983
25 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2729 0 1974

(Top 100 here)

Nakamura did much better in the blitz in Dubai, where he came third (tied for second with Ian Nepomniachtchi). He won 27 rating points to actually cross the 2900 mark, but Carlsen's 17.0/21 in Dubai and the Norway Blitz together were good for no less than 111 Elo points. The Norwegian made a huge jump, from 2837 to 2948!

phpYgmZCC.jpeg
Magnus Carlsen, now having an insane 2948 blitz rating Laughing

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Blitz | Top 25

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2948 30 1990
2 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2906 21 1987
3 Nepomniachtchi, Ian g RUS 2880 21 1990
4 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2850 30 1982
5 Le, Quang Liem g VIE 2828 26 1991
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2824 21 1985
7 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2811 21 1969
8 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2778 30 1983
9 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2777 21 1990
10 Mamedov, Rauf g AZE 2767 21 1988
11 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2758 0 1983
12 Giri, Anish g NED 2757 9 1994
13 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2757 9 1975
14 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2756 30 1976
15 Korobov, Anton g UKR 2754 21 1985
16 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2750 21 1977
17 Dreev, Aleksey g RUS 2749 21 1969
18 Sargissian, Gabriel g ARM 2749 21 1983
19 So, Wesley g PHI 2744 14 1993
20 Wojtaszek, Radoslaw g POL 2743 21 1987
21 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2739 21 1983
22 Bogdanovich, Stanislav m UKR 2737 35 1993
23 Zubov, Alexander g UKR 2737 35 1983
24 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2736 21 1976
25 Karjakin, Sergey g RUS 2732 30 1990

(Top 100 here)

As became clear even more during the Lopota Grand Prix, the difference between Judit Polgar of Hungary and Hou Yifan of China in the standard list is becoming smaller and smaller. This year Polgar has topped the women's rating list for 25 years in a row, but now the question may be asked: for how long? In the July 1 list,Hou Yifan is 47 points behind, but in the live ratings it's only 29 points.

phpZLb0Z5.jpeg
Who wouldn't want to see a Judit Polgar vs. Hou Yifan match?

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Standard | Top 25 Women

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2676 6 1976
2 Hou, Yifan g CHN 2629 0 1994
3 Koneru, Humpy g IND 2613 0 1987
4 Muzychuk, Anna g UKR 2561 0 1990
5 Zhao, Xue g CHN 2542 1 1985
6 Dzagnidze, Nana g GEO 2541 0 1987
7 Lagno, Kateryna g UKR 2540 0 1989
8 Ju, Wenjun wg CHN 2538 9 1991
9 Kosteniuk, Alexandra g RUS 2533 1 1984
10 Cmilyte, Viktorija g LTU 2525 0 1983
11 Muzychuk, Mariya m UKR 2521 0 1992
12 Khotenashvili, Bela g GEO 2518 0 1988
13 Harika, Dronavalli g IND 2513 6 1991
14 Kosintseva, Nadezhda g RUS 2513 0 1985
15 Pogonina, Natalija wg RUS 2508 9 1985
16 Ruan, Lufei wg CHN 2503 0 1987
17 Gunina, Valentina g RUS 2501 3 1989
18 Girya, Olga wg RUS 2493 9 1991
19 Cramling, Pia g SWE 2491 4 1963
20 Hoang, Thanh Trang g HUN 2490 9 1980
21 Ushenina, Anna g UKR 2488 3 1985
22 Stefanova, Antoaneta g BUL 2488 0 1979
23 Krush, Irina g USA 2484 0 1983
24 Sebag, Marie g FRA 2480 10 1986
25 Huang, Qian wg CHN 2477 7 1986

(Top 100 here)

Judit Polgar was the only female player in Dubai, and so only her results were relevant for the rapid & blitz rating lists for women. In the rapid, she lost 10 points, and now she is 35 points ahead of Humpy Koneru of India. Hou Yifan follows, with 11 points less than Koneru. 

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Rapid | Top 25 Women

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2646 15 1976
2 Koneru, Humpy g IND 2611 0 1987
3 Hou, Yifan g CHN 2600 0 1994
4 Lagno, Kateryna g UKR 2599 0 1989
5 Stefanova, Antoaneta g BUL 2578 0 1979
6 Kosteniuk, Alexandra g RUS 2577 0 1984
7 Ju, Wenjun wg CHN 2555 6 1991
8 Gunina, Valentina g RUS 2552 0 1989
9 Dzagnidze, Nana g GEO 2547 0 1987
10 Muzychuk, Anna g UKR 2546 0 1990
11 Kosintseva, Tatiana g RUS 2505 11 1986
12 Javakhishvili, Lela m GEO 2499 18 1984
13 Ushenina, Anna g UKR 2489 0 1985
14 Paehtz, Elisabeth m GER 2485 0 1985
15 Zhao, Xue g CHN 2485 0 1985
16 Sebag, Marie g FRA 2479 0 1986
17 Zhu, Chen g QAT 2464 0 1976
18 Cmilyte, Viktorija g LTU 2462 0 1983
19 Socko, Monika g POL 2455 0 1978
20 Matnadze, Ana m ESP 2449 0 1983
21 Muzychuk, Mariya m UKR 2445 0 1992
22 Krush, Irina g USA 2443 11 1983
23 Cramling, Pia g SWE 2443 0 1963
24 Shen, Yang m CHN 2442 6 1989
25 Galliamova, Alisa m RUS 2440 0 1972

(Top 100 here)

Like Nakamura, Polgar did much better in the blitz. She won 63 points, and went up from 2673 to 2736. The difference with the number two, in this case Anna Muzychuk of Ukraine, is 71 points. Also on this list Hou Yifan is third.

July 1, 2014 FIDE Ratings | Blitz | Top 25 Women

Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year
1 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2736 21 1976
2 Muzychuk, Anna g UKR 2665 0 1990
3 Hou, Yifan g CHN 2662 0 1994
4 Dzagnidze, Nana g GEO 2591 0 1987
5 Kosintseva, Tatiana g RUS 2578 0 1986
6 Gunina, Valentina g RUS 2577 0 1989
7 Zhao, Xue g CHN 2576 0 1985
8 Stefanova, Antoaneta g BUL 2569 0 1979
9 Kosteniuk, Alexandra g RUS 2548 0 1984
10 Lagno, Kateryna g UKR 2540 0 1989
11 Tan, Zhongyi wg CHN 2525 6 1991
12 Harika, Dronavalli g IND 2525 4 1991
13 Paehtz, Elisabeth m GER 2522 0 1985
14 Koneru, Humpy g IND 2521 0 1987
15 Sebag, Marie g FRA 2504 0 1986
16 Huang, Qian wg CHN 2472 6 1986
17 Ju, Wenjun wg CHN 2469 6 1991
18 Ushenina, Anna g UKR 2467 0 1985
19 Bodnaruk, Anastasia m RUS 2450 0 1992
20 Khotenashvili, Bela g GEO 2447 8 1988
21 Guseva, Marina m RUS 2442 0 1986
22 Cmilyte, Viktorija g LTU 2439 0 1983
23 Muzychuk, Mariya m UKR 2439 0 1992
24 Cramling, Pia g SWE 2433 0 1963
25 Cori T., Deysi wg PER 2429 0 1993

(Top 100 here)

All data courtesy of FIDE

16079 reads 43 comments
6 votes

Comments


  • 12 days ago

    MarvinTheRobot

    Interesting discussion here regarding the sexes of chess players. Since it has gone down the hill of personal opinions, I see that some facts should be introduced:

    This article: 
    http://phys.org/news150954140.html

    Fact 1: There is no empirical evidence implying that men are innately better at chess than women. Such evidence might pop up some time in the future, but at the moment we have no reason to conclude otherwise.

    Fact 2: The ratio of men to women chess players is about 16:1. Elementary statistics tell us that, therefore, it is far more likely that there are going to be far more extremely good male players than extremely good female players. This difference is not due to anatomy; it is due to the lack of enough women players in the field.

    Conclusion: Until we increase the number of women players by at least an order of magnitude, we cannot expect the males to stop dominating the world's TOP ranking list.

    Regarding the Women titles, I'd say that they're useful. It's not because we are sexists, it's just makes sense to lower the requirements for women, simply because women are so unnoticable in the general pool of all players due to their extremely low numbers. Yes, it's tradition, and it is a fallacy, but it does not stop it from being used in practice. Same with other sports, although in those cases it makes more sense since they rely on physical abilities, not mental ones.

    We could see this as an encouragement for women to play chess. It's easier for them to attain titles, thus, we could expect the number of female players to rise in the long run. By no means do I imply that it is the only viable option, but it might work.

    If we completely remove all the titles and female tournaments, then the handful of women will really feel like they are being drowned in the huge amounts of male players, who consistently beat them, especially in World Class tournaments. It's just makes sense to allow for partial segregation, at least for now. 

  • 3 weeks ago

    NM praveenb2002

    All right, Carlsen. You're the best!

  • 3 weeks ago

    _valentin_

    I remember an interview with Kramnik where they asked him about women's chess and in particular Polgar's play.  He said, in essence, that women play a very different kind of chess, but that Polgar "plays like a man" and is an exception.  I have to trust Kramnik's expert opinion on this, as I am not in a position to make such an assessment with my modest chess strength.

  • 3 weeks ago

    YANQUI_UXO

    "but what else can you call it, when some people's accomplishments are elevated above others for no reason other than their gender?"

    That is the whole point: it's not that someone it's elevating their accomplishments because they are men, or women: it's because it is like that and the women know it, hence I never heard them complain about it. Never. If they never complained, and the sistem it's not right...wait, isn't it a paradox? I think we can agree that in a physical sport the separation is almost forced, in chess I don't know but for now, no woman can beat the Kramniks, the Grischuks etc.

    The problem is that the current "world champion" does not want (or does not have the courage) to compete with the top dogs (as for instance Judit). Maybe because she knows that it is too much? Ushenina, when World champion, failed to win a Knight and bishop against king, in classical chess. Grischuk vs Karjakin, in a blitz match with 32 seconds...Grischuk won it!

  • 3 weeks ago

    zezpwn44

    Yang, I have no clue what you just said. I think if a woman is good enough to be a Grandmaster, she should be a Grandmaster, and I'd be happy for her! If she's not good enough to be a Grandmaster, then she shouldn't be a Grandmaster (no "WGM" title, you're either a GM or you're not).

    Federer-Sharapova? I think Federer would crush Sharapova. But I think Sharapova should have the chance to prove me wrong, instead of playing in her own segregated tennis league that excludes the best players in the world, and gives players a false sense of accomplishment!

    I know some people are too quick to use words like "Sexist," but what else can you call it, when some people's accomplishments are elevated above others for no reason other than their gender?

  • 3 weeks ago

    mcris

    I think it is not Hou Yifan's fault that J. Polgar doesn't want to play in women competitions, so the WWC title of Yifan is deserved.

  • 3 weeks ago

    YANQUI_UXO

    I am always afraid when someone starts shouting "racism, sexism" so soon.
    Anyway, you can say what you want, I don't even speak about my opinions, just about facts: now, I cannot say why it is like that (no woman being able to compete against men in chess). And guess what? I don't care probably, since I've never heard of a WGM crying about it and saying that "it is not fair!!!". I mean, maybe they know something more about it than you with all that Sexism, Racism, and "blah blah woof woof" (to quote Hendrix). I mean, you're basically saying that a woman should be a Grand Master, non a Woman Grand Master - because gender should not play any role? Then please tell me the result of Federer-Sharapova ;-)

    One more thing: if you still think that the world is All-Men Woman-Out then you're living in a distorted reality. That's what they want you to think. Little examples in everyday count for nothing, I'm speaking about the High Quarters - and everybody can go to the library and read Nietzsche anyway.

  • 3 weeks ago

    Burgerwick

    Carlsen for 3000 blitz

  • 3 weeks ago

    zezpwn44

    YanQui, to use your own argument, doesn't it strike you that NO African-American, no 6-foot-10 person, and no tri-gendered zoosexual (well, to my knowledge :p) has ever been able to compete for the chess world championship? Clearly, this means we need to institute segregated tounraments for all these people, so they can feel good about themselves and get titles based on their attributes rather than their chess playing ability, right? Wrong. And females are no different. 

    All of our brains are different. Either you're good enough, or you're not. Chess should be based on merit, not sexism and regard for one's physical attributes. If you're not good enough to do something, you're just not good enough. It doesn't really matter why you're not good enough - be it due to a learning disability, an illness, or for you sexists who say that "gender" can make someone not good enough - well, I doubt it's the case, but if it is, it shouldn't matter. Not good enough is not good enough.

     

    Also, my guess would be that the reason that hardly any females make it into the top 100 has a ton, ton more to do with the cancer that is traditional gender roles still plaguing our planet, a lot more than it has to do with anatomical differences. People who believe women need special, segregated tounraments are doing nothing to help in this regard.

  • 3 weeks ago

    rajnikant001

    it is a sad to see hikaru nakamura's drop  in blitz and rapid rank.considering that he is famous on internet for being the best in blitz and rapid.

    i just hope that hikaru deals with this blow and recovers quickly to get back or improve his rank.

  • 4 weeks ago

    chessrook1234

    I want Naka and Caruana (Americans) to displace Magnus soon.....

  • 4 weeks ago

    chessrook1234

    once they cross 2500, they should be made to play minimum 4 (or whatever number) mens tourney mandatory..otherwise they will beat up 2200 players and collect insane points like yifan is doing

  • 4 weeks ago

    fabelhaft

    "there's a slice of the population that seems to care about such segregation still in the XXI century.  So let them be, if it makes their day"

    Yay, go medieval segregation, make my day! :-)

  • 4 weeks ago

    YANQUI_UXO

    But really, doesn't it strike you that in 100 years of chess, NO woman (just Judit) was actually able to compete against men? There is no segregation here, there is no hate, it's a fact. And yes, it strikes me as a very interesting one.

  • 4 weeks ago

    YANQUI_UXO

    Zezpwn, are you trying to shut the "difference" door like that? Your arguments are a little too semplicistic (on the role of woman/man brain in chess etcetera). That said, Yifan is no world champion to me. She either has to wait that Judit dies or she has to win a match against her. First option is more probable since we all die - of course a match does not depend only on the Hou...

  • 4 weeks ago

    Ricardoruben

    Judit Polgar cut the sweets!

  • 4 weeks ago

    _valentin_

    fabelhalf just gave the answer and zezpwn44 quoted it -- it's all based on tradition.  Whether it is significant or not, or whether it's a logical fallacy or not (which I agree it is), there's a slice of the population that seems to care about such segregation still in the XXI century.  So let them be, if it makes their day.

    Separately from this, there's well known anatomical distinctions in the male vs. female brains (in how they're wired, what each pays more attention to, what each is stronger in, etc.), and since chess is a brain-based game one could argue that there's a reason to count males and females separately -- since the hardware, metaphorically speaking, that each group owns isn't identical but matters.  (Note that, in contrast, race and height are not scientifically known to affect mental performance.)

    Some day those physical distinctions people make may blur, but we as a civilization / nation / society aren't there yet, and it's a stretch to claim that we have to be just yet.  There's experiences and ideas which many people haven't yet lived to appreciate; that's what causes many such fallacies to live on still.

  • 4 weeks ago

    zezpwn44

    Did you not read a word I said? I could say the same thing : "No amount of wishful thinking would make the number of blacks over 2600 more than 1." So what? What's the significance of that?

    The rest is an appeal to tradition (a logical fallacy), and given how segregated the US alone was in the 1920s, I don't think we should be taking any lessons for avoiding segregated chess tounraments from that era, anyways.

     

    You completely and utterly ignored my question. Why is gender any more worthy of segregated tounraments than race, sexual orientation, height, eye color, or any other charachteristcs? Some of those are rare, too (probably fewer than 70 2400+s for some of them), so your "rarity" argument falls on its face. So what's the reason?

  • 4 weeks ago

    fabelhaft

    There's been a women's World Championship since 1927, and no amount of wishful thinking makes the number of 2400 rated women more than just 70, and as long as that's how it is the tradition of arranging some tournaments for women will continue. Then it's another thing that Hou mainly plays opens since many years back.

  • 4 weeks ago

    zezpwn44

    Fabelhaft, so it's significant just because it's rare? So why don't we have the "BGM" title ("Black grand master"), or the "NHGM" title (Non-heterosexual grand master), or the "VTGM" (Very tall grandmaster) title. Depending on how you define these things, they'd likely be less common that WGMs, but that doesn't make them significant. All it means is you're taking a bunch of charachteristics that have absolutely nothing to do with chess playing ability, and pretending they mean something. Gender is no different.

     

    Maurice Ashley doesn't try to get "Black-only" tounraments set up for him, and a "Black world championship" title that he can pretend means something. Why do women need their own special titles and segregated tounraments, when gender has nothing to do with chess playing ability?

     

    We need to stop descriminating based on physical charachteristics. I thought we would have learned this lesson back in the Civil Rights movement. Chess is all that matters in chess. Either player A is better than player B, or he/she is not. Yifan simply isn't better than the 100+ men above her, and that's all that should matter to anyone who's not a sexist.

     

    (No disrespect to Yifan of course. She's a great player. But maybe she (and all other women) need to start following Polgar's lead and quit playing in their own special segregated tounraments, and allow anyone and everyone to challenge them.)

Back to Top

Post your reply: