I have a feeling that an 1800 player today is better than an 1800 player 30 years ago. That is just a hunch and an opinion. Maybe someone else can chime in and give a better answer.
How do today's class players compare with past?
Sort:
can't speak about 30 years ago, but speaking today when i play again old people in tournaments i feel that they have a better calculation than me and more tactic knowledge but strategically i'm better, for them is all about tactic and the middlegame is the only important stage.
I stopped playing in 1973 and am considering a return to tournament play. I am quite impressed with how powerful the engines and databases are. Even clicking through master games on a web page is rather amazing, as opposed to alternating between the book and the board by hand.
I also see much more awareness of chess education. When I played, it was pretty hit-or-miss -- read some books, study some openings, play some blitz, and go to tournaments when you can.
There wasn't that much available: MCO, Fine's Basic Endgames, the Euwe middle game books, all those Fred Reinfeld books and various game collections plus some old classics from Lasker and Capablanca.
Now there is so much, much more, along with chess tutors available online and everywhere.
On the other hand, these days almost every child has a computer and educational software and we can see how much of difference that has made.
How would, say, an 1800 player today compare with an 1800 player thirty or forty years ago?
They might have better opening knowledge, but would other aspects of their game be better? Have the chess programs, better training techniques and materials improved class play?