The irony is Carlsen's rating is deflated compared to his playing strength.
Rating Inflation??
Sort:
this has been covered into the ground
May 13, 2014
0
#5
I think he meant that in the hierarchy of players at that time, the position of a 2380 player (percentile rank) was similar to the position of a 2500 player nowadays.
He probably meant their core skills (chess skills with the exception of opening preparation) were similar too.
I have played online chess since the internet began and the one thing I notice is overall chess skill has gone up with all chess players, globally. But among top players, their ratings have inflated a lot. You see this on ICC and Playchess where there are many 3000 rated players. But 10 years ago....a GM on Playchess by username of Hawkeye, was considered very good and his blitz was only 2700 or 2800.
What more to say? If a lot of strong players from there switch here, I believe the top ratings will inflate.
isauro2013 wrote:
I was listening to a video lecture given by GM Bojkov, and he was mentioning the White player Cardon, who was playing against Timman, and he said: "in that period, the 80ies, Cardon was around 2380, which counting inflation is like a 2500 today..."
I don't understand the comment, because in my opinion, inflation is related to a way a government tries to cover its debts printing more money (if I do it is illegal, but if the government does it, then it is ok!). But the rating couldn't be inflated, because it should be a mathematical measure of the strength of a player against others.
Further, a 2500 today, with all the computer training, and the coaches, chances to play against strong computer engines, or also in strong tournaments, should be stronger than a player in the 1980ies.
So my idea is that a 2300 today is strong like a 2500 of the 1980ies, and not vice-versa.
What do you think?
http://en.chessbase.com/post/elo-oddities-the-tortoise-and-the-hare
Is the article to read on this issue. If you believe in the Sonas hypothesis, and that today's players are not that much more skilled than yesteryear's, then rating inflation is about 100 points, roughly what GM Bojkov observes.
I was listening to a video lecture given by GM Bojkov, and he was mentioning the White player Cardon, who was playing against Timman, and he said: "in that period, the 80ies, Cardon was around 2380, which counting inflation is like a 2500 today..."
I don't understand the comment, because in my opinion, inflation is related to a way a government tries to cover its debts printing more money (if I do it is illegal, but if the government does it, then it is ok!). But the rating couldn't be inflated, because it should be a mathematical measure of the strength of a player against others.
Further, a 2500 today, with all the computer training, and the coaches, chances to play against strong computer engines, or also in strong tournaments, should be stronger than a player in the 1980ies.
So my idea is that a 2300 today is strong like a 2500 of the 1980ies, and not vice-versa.
What do you think?