Chess ability is definitely higher than it was years ago, I agree.
However, the "game rating" estimate is not something to be taken seriously. The numbers it gives are usually quite inflated.
post game elo estimates vs actual player elo
Sort:
I don't know how chess.com calculates the game rating, but it very frequently returns values far above the players' ratings.
hi longterm ~1625elo here.
Game after game, consistently, the average play strength according to chess.com post game analysis at my standard is ~1900. The winner usually gets a post game elo estimate 2000~2300, the loser is typically 1550~1800.
Is this just a quirk of the system? Or is this a sign of the times? : 50 million new players since the queen's gambit covid flood, millions climbing up, playing above their elo, and the old players having to play +200 elo higher just to maintain their standing while the flood of improving new players flow upwards to their actual playing strengths?
sry don't have time to compile stats, can take this instance as a case-in-point.