Vast Difference between Current and Peak Ratings

Hello, All!

I have noticed that the slight majority of the people I play are between 100 and 200 points lower than their peak ratings, and in most cases the peak was relatively recent (a year or so).  My rating sits a lot, at worst, 100 points lower than my peak, but most of the time I am only 30-50 points away.  (Note: I play only blitz on this site.)  Are these people using engines on some of their runs or something else?

I don't think 100 or even 200 points is a lot if a player is active. 

Your own rating has fluctuated a lot more than you remember. It looks like you had a swing of almost  from a high of 1674 on November 13th to a low of 1514 on November 23rd.

A mere 10 days knocked 160 points off your rating. What happened?

I doubt anything happened. It was the luck of the draw.

Excellent information.  Thanks!  These sorts of graphs are available for paying members?

In regard to your point, that's one instance, and I wouldn't be surprised if I came across a few people with those kinds of current rating to peak rating differences, but I am seeing a slight majority of players as having significantly lower current ratings than their peak.

If anything, I think my rating could be a counterpoint to the that swings larger than my own are reasonable.  For instance, on Monday into Tuesday, I logged more than 12 hours of playing time, yet had at most a 100-point drop.  Additionally, because of my work and study schedule away from chess, much of my play is done at about the worst times of day for me and especially when I am sick (which is what happened right after I peaked).  Playing during times when I am mentally fresh, etc., does not cause a 100-200 point up-swing.  

Anyways, I am just very curious about this.  I already think, just within my own rating, that ratings seem swingy on this site, but I have seen differences between current and peak ratings that dwarf my own.

Yes, the additional statistics are one of the benefits of premium memberships.

It would be interesting to study the rated population and see what kind of rating fluctuation is actually "significant".   You may want to read up on ratings and the Glicko system that chess.com uses.  http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/glicko-rd11

http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-ratings---how-they-work

I am not great at blitz but my rating has recently dropped over 200 points and it often drops 150 from the peak.

What is interesting to me is that when I played OTB I noticed that I and many others had big swings in their rating.

The only explanation I have is that chess is a competive sport and sometimes we are just not on our game. Same thing can happen in a physical sport.

Curious what others think?

Sometimes people get sick, don't get enough sleep, have a lot of stress, or have other issues that effect their playing ability. Its fairly easy to lose a couple hundred points in a day if you are playing with these issues, especially if you don't care too much about your online rating. It can be hard to destress or catch up on sleep and it might be awhile before they are 100% again. Similarly if they lose their stress, and get a lot of sleep for a few days their rating might explode upwards a few hundred points, showing how strong they are when not mentally burdened. You can also get lucky and win a bunch of games in a row.

When you first join the site, the rating system gives you the benefit of the doubt and gives lots of points for wins. This is done with what's called RD. Over time, this variable adjusts itself to your actual skill.

As the RD variable settles down, your rating stablizes. However, the initial spike is what's recorded by C.c as your highest rating. 

I am one of the people on here who consistently plays when I am extremely tired (I have no other time to play), and one does not find that my peaks are 200 pts better because I play a few occasions when I am not extremely tired.

I just think some of the rating swings I see are inexplicable.  A 200 point drop indicates an extreme difference in cognitive function that goes beyond sleep deprivation.  Intoxication, use of computers, (brief) periods of chess blindness, and changes in the rating equations are about the only ways I can account for such swings.  I mean, I suffered mental exhaustion from an insane training routine I recently did, and I did not drop 200 points (I dropped 138, then stabilized), and I was complete confused when looking at the board, compared to usual.

I do buy what kleelof is saying, but most of the people I play who have gone up to 2000 or 1800 and have fallen to 1400-1550 didn't get those ratings at the beginning of their chess.com tenure.

Not so long ago I droped into the high 1500's and right now am at a peak rating in the high 1700's.

I found that sometimes 1400's can give me a great deal of trouble and sometimes 1700's are complete pushovers. Peak rating often comes from another person(s) off day.

In my opinion anyone in a within range of 100 points is about the same in terms of chess idea's. The higher rated person just tends to make slightly less losing moves.

What is the age of your opponents?

Most players over fifty will be starting to slow down and lose points. In many cases, they will not be able to stay above their floors. It just seems to be an aging thing.

50 is the new 30.

I think 30 might be when it gets really hard to improve. But people's ratings don't plummet until a bit later I feel. I wonder what will happen to me.