Is the rating difference between better players and lesser players is growing? That might cause inflation of the average of the ratings. And who knows? maybe experts get more out of computer study tools than non experts do (likely), and that could explain the growth in the average rating (if it exists).
Rating inflation
Sort:
Sep 15, 2016
0
#2
Is the average USCF or FIDE ratings higher now than in the past? how else could you measure rating inflation?
Is the rating difference between better players and lesser players is growing? That might cause inflation of the average of the ratings. And who knows? maybe experts get more out of computer study tools than non experts do (likely), and that could explain the growth in the average rating (if it exists).
Is the rating difference between better players and lesser players is growing? That might cause inflation of the average of the ratings. And who knows? maybe experts get more out of computer study tools than non experts do (likely), and that could explain the growth in the average rating (if it exists).
no one knows exactly about ELo inflation
they can only tell you that many years ago 2600 was fantastic, a world class result
now among GM chess players it is only "meh" good and no longer 'world class'.
there are more Gm's than ever (originally the term was an expressions for just a handful of the very best chess players), the top GM has a bigger Elo rating than others did at the best, and the number of people at a given rating is higher than it was in the best.
perhaps people far stronger and more knowledgeable will tell us that they know exactly what has caused this inflation. I'm skeptical. some very bright people on the net seem undecided. there is a theory that its because of computer guided reportoires,etc. but... : skeptical
among patzers there is NOT really (I think) that much inflation. 1200 is a noob and not strong, 1600= strong club and 2000= a local expert.
It's not rating inflation. Only the tail end of the distribution curve as stretched further out (first going to 2800+ and now approaching 2900). The overall mean and median ratings of the entire chess playing populations has not gone up over 100 points. There is data to support this. Therefore, this means the spread has increased. This is different from inflation (that would be a rightward shift of the entire rating distribution curve along the X-axis).
Sep 15, 2016
0
#5
There is some theoretical justification for believing in a gradual inflation of ratings, especially on casual chess sites like this one.
New players are assigned a provisional rating of 1200. When players quit playing chess, they take their accumulated rating points with them, out of the pool.
Who is more likely to quit... a new player who has seen his new 1200 rating drop to 800, or a somewhat more experienced player who has fought his way up to 1600?
When the new player quits, that's 400 "free" rating points that end up getting gradually redistributed in the pool of active ratings.
I 've been reading a lot of forum posts lately and in one of them I noticed a member refer to something called rating inflation. Not sure what that is so I thought I'd ask you guys.
Does this have something to do with engines?
It got me wondering. Super GM's are so good at calculation and memorization, does rating inflation refer to them having the ability to remember suggested computer lines in certain openings etc? Ideas, positions and sharp continuations they themselves may not have reached without the help of a 3000+ engine and the ability to memorize it.
I know there are so many possibilities that can occur during a chess game. I know that sooner or later you have to think for yourself no matter what your rating. I guess what I'm asking is, if I'm on the right track about rating inflation, do chess engines make the best players better, or worse?
This is just my thoughts. Not sure if I'm even close to right when it comes to the term rating inflation