|
|
|
Topic: Todays ratings vs 30 years ago
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
If a player rated 2000 today traveled in a time machine to the year 1982 what would happen to his rating? I think that technology has made it easier to learn chess especially openings. I think our time traveler's rating would do up. Chess base helps me play better but it also helps my opponents. I think that players rated 1600 - 2000 uscf were not as well booked as players today. It is possible to test my theory without inventing time travel. There must be some fullly funtional chess computers from the 1980's presumably time has not change how well they play. I think we should enter these computers in tournaments today and see how they do. If there new ratings are far lower than the original ratings my theory is confirmed. My goal has been to become a master. It is possible that I have achieved the level of play that would have been at the master level in 1982 but everyone has gotten better so I am only an expert. One reason I use USCF ratngs is FIDE did not rate players who were weaker than USCF masters 30 years ago. My question would be just as valid using any nations rating system.
|
|
|
Interesting question. The only OTB chess I’ve played in the last 40 years was at a local club a few years back…mostly opponents around 1600-1700 so I can’t rightfully judge OTB play. However my CC rating is about the same now that it was 40 years ago. I’d like to think I learned something about chess in the last 40 years but when I analyze my old CC games with an engine they seem no better or worse played than the ones I play today. Despite that my gut feeling is that even below master players are better today but by how much I couldn’t guess.
Class players of the old days, like class players today, believed knowing the openings would translate into wins, so the study of openings was popular then too. When I played OTB in the 1960’s and 1970’s I got my fair share of lectures from 1400-1500’s about how crappy my opening play was because my moves weren’t what Fischer played.
|
|
|
Odie, I take it that these comments were something like, "Yes, you beat me, even destroyed me, but my opening was better! Nyah, nyah, nyah!" Am I pretty close? 
|
|
|
<Don't you guys think about money and proffessionalism. Untill the time of Kasparov,the top chess players where just a bunch of poor guys. I remember that Jan Timman had to borrow money from Hans Bohm to play his world champion semi-final match against Anatoly Karpov. That's not such a long time ago.
Nowedays the full professionals play chess all day, analysing games and preparing their next games. And don't forget, all top players have secundants who do the analyses of many games of their next opponents for them,
Of course ratings go up all the time...
Records will be broken on all diciplines of sports all the time as long the conditions for the players improve.
|
|
|
tewald...so, you've played them, too?
|
|
|
Odie_Spud
"Class players of the old days, like class players today, believed knowing the openings would translate into wins, so the study of openings was popular then too."
But less effecient. When I study a line using Chess base I typically follow one game to its conclusion. It is far easier using chess base. Before chess base when I wanted to go from one variation or another I had to return to the start of the game. I could not play 20 moves from a book and have the right position.
"but when I analyze my old CC games with an engine they seem no better or worse played than the ones I play today."
Here is an interesting idea. someone should develop a program that will predict a players rating based his chess moves and not the ratings of his oppponents. Suppose you gave this program 100 games of 100 players but not their ratings. If it could predict the average rating of these 100 players and the standard deviation the program could be used to compare ratings between eras (today vs 30 years ago) and websites.
Mr. DJRVD
"Don't you guys think about money and proffessionalism."
I do but my question is about players rated 1600 - 2000 USCF. Your remark belongs in a different subject heading.
|
| 1 2 Next |
|
|
|
