# Win percentages for specific rating differences. On an average what percentage of games are won by a player 100 points stronger than his opponent?

How much does his rating change if he has been playing for a long time in the FIDE system?

At what rating difference does the number of points gained from the higher rating player become zero? aman_makhija wrote:

On an average what percentage of games are won by a player 100 points stronger than his opponent?

64%  according to:  Calculator for

### Theoretical Probability of Winning Based on ELO Ratings:

How much does his rating change if he has been playing for a long time in the FIDE system?

See FIDE.com for an explanation of how they calculate ratings.  The experience factor or K factor is something that recently changed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

At what rating difference does the number of points gained from the higher rating player become zero?

Depends on what system you are using. ELO, Glicko, etc. But the first one said my win probablility was 35% for a hundred point difference. But how does this translate to rating in the ELO system?

Please explain and thx for the response. A win percentage of 35% doesn't mean that you'll "win" 35% of your games. It means that, in the long run, you'll score about 35%. So maybe out of 100 games, you'd win 10 and draw 50. Yeah, but what a about rating changes? How much is it for 100 points? No response? aman_makhija wrote:

No response?

Are you asking for this (picture below)?

100 points shows 64% (for higher rated) vs 36% (for lower rated)

Notice that the Elo formula doesn't care what the ratings are, it only cares what the difference between the ratings are.  For most non titled players the K factor is 20 in FIDE and your rating is updated by K x [actual score - expected score]

So if you are rated 100 points lower, your expected score is .35

If you win, your actual score is 1. So you will gain 20 x [1 - 0.35] = 13 points.

Note though that FIDE calculates to add 1/10s (and I think even 1/100s) of points. So there may not be a rating for which you really earn zero points. You're probably always gaining at least 0.01

For many titled players the K factor is 10, so they would only gain 10 x .65 = 6.5 points for beating someone rated 100 points above them. 0110001101101000 wrote:

For most non titled players the K factor is 20 in FIDE and your rating is updated by K x [actual score - expected score]

So if you are rated 100 points lower, your expected score is .35

If you win, your actual score is 1. So you will gain 20 x [1 - 0.35] = 13 points.

Note though that FIDE calculates to add 1/10s (and I think even 1/100s) of points. So there may not be a rating for which you really earn zero points. You're probably always gaining at least 0.01

For many titled players the K factor is 10, so they would only gain 10 x .65 = 6.5 points for beating someone rated 100 points above them.

Thanks, that was helpful. And so was the table.

If you know, wht is the K-factor for my rating range (1300-1500) The link below gives some different K factors.

It seems new players and players under the age of 18 have a K factor of 40.

People over the age of 18 who have played over 30 games and have a rating under 2400 have a K factor of 20.

Players with over 30 games and a rating over 2400 have a K factor of 10 regardless of their age.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system#Most_accurate_K-factor 8.56 K is the development coefficient. K = 40 for a player new to the rating list until he has completed events with at least 30 games K = 20 as long as a player's rating remains under 2400. K = 10 once a player's published rating has reached 2400 and remains at that level subsequently, even if the rating drops below 2400. K = 40 for all players until their 18th birthday, as long as their rating remains under 2300. My K-factor is 40, then. I m 11 yrs old and rating is 1223 because I don't play enough tournaments. Online rating is 1640 for rapid (30 min) chess. That is a difference of 700+ pts, so according to the table, there's a <1% chance. 0110001101101000 schreef:
aman_makhija wrote:

No response?

Are you asking for this (picture below)?

100 points shows 64% (for higher rated) vs 36% (for lower rated)

Notice that the Elo formula doesn't care what the ratings are, it only cares what the difference between the ratings are.

Is there also an image available where u can see this kind of statistics for white and black? Playing chess with white or black make pretty big difference in the % i think. FPTR wrote:
0110001101101000 schreef:
aman_makhija wrote:

No response?

Are you asking for this (picture below)?

100 points shows 64% (for higher rated) vs 36% (for lower rated)

Notice that the Elo formula doesn't care what the ratings are, it only cares what the difference between the ratings are.

Is there also an image available where u can see this kind of statistics for white and black? Playing chess with white or black make pretty big difference in the % i think.

I have never seen any separate charts.  The white win percentage (wins plus draws/2) would be approximately from 52% to 55%, depending on what study you use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess

If we use 55%, that  corresponds to a rating advantage of 33 to 39 points in the table shown above. aman_makhija wrote:

On an average what percentage of games are won by a player 100 points stronger than his opponent?

How much does his rating change if he has been playing for a long time in the FIDE system?

At what rating difference does the number of points gained from the higher rating player become zero?