![[au]](/mwf/v12/flags/au.png "Australia")
I think VT has clinched the #1 spot on the January 2009 FIDE list. Even if Radjabov wins 8 more games, and VT loses two (and FIDE rates these all), I think VT will edge him.
![[de]](/mwf/v12/flags/de.png "Germany")
Okay, VT wins today with black against PS and has now Elo 2810 (and +4 in the tournament)!
PS: So after Kasparov, Kramnik and Anand Topalov is the fourth Elo 2800 player!
PS: So after Kasparov, Kramnik and Anand Topalov is the fourth Elo 2800 player!
>Okay, VT wins today with black against PS and has now Elo 2810
I can't say I think much of the Chess Oscar in general, but my guess is that VT is the favourite for 2008, with VA the other main possibility. However, this perception might be a bit skewed toward the end of the year (recall that VT was -1 at Wijk aan Zee). MC might get some votes (large ELO gain), or maybe even Wang Yue from FIDE-GP flunkies. VI had the 5-0 start at MTel, and Morozevich had a few nice results (Bosna), but really only VT, VA and MC had anyone talking (and the voters are journalists). Notice that I don't even mention Aronian, though he had a decent year too.
>PS: So after Kasparov, Kramnik and Anand Topalov is the fourth Elo 2800 player!
VT is not (yet) even at a personal high: he was 2813 previously (July 2006).
Oh, I see. So we have this ranking:
1. Kasparov 2851 (1999)
2. Topalov 2813 (07/2006)
3. Kramnik 2809 (10/2001)
3. Anand 2803 (04/2006)
![[mx]](/mwf/v12/flags/mx.png "Mexico")
If the "30elo per 10 years" theory holds true, this is how these ratings would translate to today's strength (not counting months, rounding up to 2009), that is, how the performance of that time would be rated today:
(2009 correction):
1. Kasparov 2821
2. Topalov 2804
3. Anand 2794
4. Kramnik 2785
If the "30elo per 10 years" theory holds true,
I don´t know this theory. I only know that it was much harder for Kasparov to get these 2851 Elo points in 1999 than to get them in 2008. Today you only have to be ~50 Elo better than your best five opponents, in 1999 you have to be ~100 Elo better.
PS: It´s alike in the Rybka case. The opponents are too weak, therefore she has only Elo 3200! :-)
I don´t know this theory. I only know that it was much harder for Kasparov to get these 2851 Elo points in 1999 than to get them in 2008. Today you only have to be ~50 Elo better than your best five opponents, in 1999 you have to be ~100 Elo better.
PS: It´s alike in the Rybka case. The opponents are too weak, therefore she has only Elo 3200! :-)
Right, since Kasparov's rating was underrated because there was a gap between him and 2nd best, his rating needs to be corrected before being corrected :)
You forgot about old champions like Lasker, Steinitz, Capablanca :-)
So Topalov is the second highest rated player in history, not bad at all, let's see how far he can push it.
If Topa can stay consistent he could probably get over 2820 and maybe beyond. Reaching Kasparov's 2851 would be something truly special, and very difficult.
Kramnik has been upto 2811.
If Topa can stay consistent he could probably get over 2820 and maybe beyond. Reaching Kasparov's 2851 would be something truly special, and very difficult.
Kramnik has been upto 2811.
Kramnik has been upto 2811.
When? I can´t believe, it was before his WCCC match in october 2000 against Kasparov.
When? I can´t believe, it was before his WCCC match in october 2000 against Kasparov.
![[us]](/mwf/v12/flags/us.png "United States")
I remember that it was sometime in 2001.
I can´t find it in my above link (official FIDE Elo ranking from Kramnik since 07/2000).
Don't know when, think around 2001. But if you go to chessgames.com, and have a look at highest rating achieved for Kramnik it's 2811.
One opinion is that VK never made it to 2811, even though the FIDE site says so in some places. A Wikipedia page notes the bafflement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparing_top_chess_players_throughout_history
Footnote 4. The graph on the FIDE site gives Kramnik's peak rating as 2811, but this appears to be incorrect: it is contradicted by FIDE's published ratings for January and April 2002; and also by the reports in TWIC for January and April 2002.
Indeed, why should you expect FIDE to get FIDE ratings correct? :-P My guess is that TWIC is just parroting FIDE, so it's not exactly an independent confirmation.
Can anyone find the 4 games he supposedly played from October 2001 to January 2002? This might allow the situation to be rectified. The quarterly FIDE list pushes him down to 2807 in July 2002, due to the 3 games played --- but then he is suddenly up to 2809 on the October 2002 list, even though he played 0 games in the preceding 3-month period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparing_top_chess_players_throughout_history
3 2809^[4] Vladimir Kramnik 2001-10 RussiaFootnote 4. The graph on the FIDE site gives Kramnik's peak rating as 2811, but this appears to be incorrect: it is contradicted by FIDE's published ratings for January and April 2002; and also by the reports in TWIC for January and April 2002.
Indeed, why should you expect FIDE to get FIDE ratings correct? :-P My guess is that TWIC is just parroting FIDE, so it's not exactly an independent confirmation.
Can anyone find the 4 games he supposedly played from October 2001 to January 2002? This might allow the situation to be rectified. The quarterly FIDE list pushes him down to 2807 in July 2002, due to the 3 games played --- but then he is suddenly up to 2809 on the October 2002 list, even though he played 0 games in the preceding 3-month period.
That's interesting...either way, I definitely do remember him entering tournaments around that time with a rating of 2809, so at least this was "official"...
>Can anyone find the 4 games he supposedly played from October 2001 to January 2002?
I think those are the four games from the Botvinnik Memorial Match that were neither rapid nor blitz. Four draws against Kasparov, in 18, 72, 21, and 19 moves. This was December 1st-9th in 2001.
![[ng]](/mwf/v12/flags/ng.png "Nigeria")
Yes, it's difficult to note Kramnik's top rating. I remembered then when he was rated 2807 sometimes you see 2809. This was about the time he played Deep Fritz 7. But FIDE had it as 2809
Top 100 Players April 2003 2 g 2789 25
Top 100 Players January 2003 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players October 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players July 2002 2 g 2807 3
Top 100 Players April 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players January 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players October 2001 2 g 2809 10
Top 100 Players July 2001 2 g 2802 10
Source: http://ratings.fide.com/top_files.phtml?id=4101588
Top 100 Players April 2003 2 g 2789 25
Top 100 Players January 2003 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players October 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players July 2002 2 g 2807 3
Top 100 Players April 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players January 2002 2 g 2809 0
Top 100 Players October 2001 2 g 2809 10
Top 100 Players July 2001 2 g 2802 10
Source: http://ratings.fide.com/top_files.phtml?id=4101588
My favourite would be VI, if there wasn´t this damned game against Kamsky in last round of the Olympiad and the follow-up. It´s not only because of doping, but now Chucky is ailing (see Pearl spring tournament).
So, in 2008 Kamsky crushed Chucky :-( and in 2009 Kamsky will (maybe) crush Topalov (if this match will ever start).
So, in 2008 Kamsky crushed Chucky :-( and in 2009 Kamsky will (maybe) crush Topalov (if this match will ever start).
It's now Anand's duty as world champ to also have the highest rating, will be tough getting up to 2810. Is Topalov really stronger than Anand? I say at his peak yes, what do others think?
I think yes, at his peak, but I think that overall right now, Anand is stronger.
Would be an interesting match between the two for sure.
In a match between Topalov and Anand, Topalov should have a winning chance of about 70%. Check out what VT did at the FIDE 2005 World Championship Tourney. He practical beat everybody in the first round - the only draw was from Anand and VT was having a winning position - KQPP vs KQ - oh 6-man TBs!.
I would not put Topalov's chances at 70%, if that was the case that means he should have destroyed Kramnik in 2006 but did not. Since Anand beat Kramnik, and Topalov lost to Kramnik. I say it would be very close 50/50. Topalov is very strong but is prone to blunders, more so than any other top 5 super GM.
Also, there is a huge difference between tournaments and matches, Topa had a good run in 2005. If he beats Kamsky which he should then we will all see what happens when he takes on Anand in the next WC match.
Also, there is a huge difference between tournaments and matches, Topa had a good run in 2005. If he beats Kamsky which he should then we will all see what happens when he takes on Anand in the next WC match.
>I can't say I think much of the Chess Oscar in general,
Hmm, I find out that Morozevich had the highest 2008 rating about 3 months ago (http://members.aon.at/sfischl/cl2008.txt):
Performance in classical games 2008 (up to 22/09/2008)
Name #games W L D AvgOpp Score PerfRat
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.Morozevich,A 29 + 13- 4= 12 2698 66% 2809
2.Carlsen,M 73 + 26- 10= 37 2725 61% 2802
3.Topalov,V 47 + 17- 11= 19 2747 56% 2792
4.Ivanchuk,V 100 + 27- 9= 64 2725 59% 2788
5.Anand,V 37 + 7- 4= 26 2749 54% 2777My guess is that Topalov is now easily at the top.
Incidentally, VK had 2824 in 2007, versus 2795 for VA, though the latter won the Oscar. VK's margin at the top was even bigger in 2006, when his 2836 beat out VT's 2781. GK didn't make 20 games in 2005, else his 2853 would have been tops. VT beat VA 2825-2781 (and LA was 3rd with 2745). VA won 2004 by a similar margin, 2810-2773 over VT, while 2003 was also a VA year at 2774, edging out GK at 2770 (and only 18 games), with Polgar next at 2764. The most dominant year this decade was 2002, when GK's 2871 was over 100 points more than Grischuk's 2nd place 2761 --- in fact, GK was +10=11 with no losses that year. Both GK and VK made it over 2800 in 2001, though the honours went to GK by 2852-2820 (again GK had no losses); the previous year, VK had the edge at 2825-2808. Tabulating this:
2007 Kramnik 2824 Anand 2795
2006 Kramnik 2836 Topalov 2781
2005 Topalov 2825 Anand 2781 [Kasparov 2853 in 12 games]
2004 Anand 2810 Topalov 2773
2003 Anand 2774 Polgar 2764 [Kasparov 2770 in 18 games]
2002 Kasparov 2871 Grischuk 2761
2001 Kasparov 2852 Kramnik 2820
2000 Kramnik 2825 Kasparov 2808Kramnik only had one loss in 2000 in 46 games (though only 10 wins), and Svidler only had one loss in 80 games(!) in 2003. GK's poor 2004 was largely due to a large draw percentage, as he won 8, lost 1, and made 25 draws. VK again only had one loss in 2007. He can thank Morozevich for that at the FIDE-WC.
Disclaimer: I don't claim to have verified any of these numbers, or to have determined exactly how they were computed. The site also has an "Improved Elo Rating", though again I have not investigated therein. See it all at http://members.aon.at/sfischl/stat.html
1.Morozevich, 2809
2.Carlsen, 2802
3.Topalov, 2792
4.Ivanchuk, 2788
5.Anand, 2777The list is too old - 22-09-08. After the update VT should be on top of the chart. Anand with his win over VK should be around 1st or 2nd.
>The list is too old - 22-09-08. After the update VT should be on top of the chart. Anand with his win over VK should be around 1st or 2nd.
I agree with the lack of timeliness; it seems as though the site only re-issues these when a new FIDE list comes out. VT had a perf of 2821 over 8 games, and then 2890 over another 10. My computation is that this gives him 2811 for the year, though I'm being a bit sloppy. With the FIDE-WC included, VA's yearly perf should be about 2791 --- so it is not so much that he gained, as that AM and MC have lost a bit to boost him into 2nd place. Morozevich was 2720 in 9 games, and also something like 2727 in 11 games in the SuperFinal; due to the fact that he had only played 29 games before this, reduces his perf to about 2775. I don't have the latest Bundesliga results at hand, but MC was 2757 in 11 games in Dresden, plus 2693 in 6 games in the EuroClubChamp, and these should dip him just below VA.
So, one view is that the list will be headed by:
Topalov 2811
Anand 2791
Carlsen 2789 [missing Bundesliga games]
Morozevich 2775
Ivanchuk 2775 [missing Spanish League games]Though it depends on whether you count various things (like the FIDE deadline is December 15th, but I would count all the FIDE-GP in the mix). My guess is that VA will still win the Chess Oscar, partly because the press-world thinks the FIDE-WC is of premier import, and partly because VA seems to be more likable than VT in the large.
![[be]](/mwf/v12/flags/be.png "Belgium")
sorry but nanjing is not counted people (closing date for elo was 15/12)
so topalov will gain 5 and be on 2796
http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=2900084
so topalov will gain 5 and be on 2796
http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=2900084
What a joke. So what's the point of publishing January's ratings when they are not accurate? Fide should go off the live rating system.
>sorry but nanjing is not counted people (closing date for elo was 15/12)
The nebulous meaning of a "FIDE deadline" in this regard has been noted before. For instance, this last April they at first followed their then-current "rules" in not rating Morelia/Linares, and rating it would have moved Anand into first place (over Topalov). Sufficiently many people complained (and indeed, noted Linares had been included in the April ratings in previous years, and furthermore, other tournaments with the same date-line had been included), so they rated it anyway. At that time, the tournament nominally had to finish a whole month in advance of the deadline. In the end, FIDE will do what FIDE will do: people can ignore or follow them as they wish.
To fully appreciate the FIDE incompetence, look at the name of this link:
http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/3598-deadline-for-rating-reports-for-december-2008-fide-rating-list
Of course, it will be the January 2009 FIDE rating list.
>For instance, this last April [FIDE broke its "rules" (though not its tradition) in rating Linares, so as to move Anand to #1]
Ooops, I meant April 2007, maybe as in "this last previous April" :-P
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill