Are ratings inflated or deflated?
08 Nov '06 19:50I was taking a look at the October English ratings and I recognised one or two players from this site. However I could not decide whether the ECF ratings are deflated or inflated. In http://www.answers.com/topic/elo-rating-system they say :-
Originally Elo Article
The primary goal of ELO ratings is to accurately predict game results between contemporary competitors, and FIDE ratings perform this task relatively well. A secondary, more ambitious goal is to use ratings to compare players between different eras. (See also Greatest chess player of all time.) It would be convenient if a FIDE rating of 2500 meant the same thing in 2005 that it meant in 1975. If the ratings suffer from inflation, then a modern rating of 2500 means less than a historical rating of 2500, while if the ratings suffer from deflation, the reverse will be true. Unfortunately, even among people who would like ratings from different eras to "mean the same thing", intuitions differ sharply as to whether a given rating should represent a fixed absolute skill or a fixed relative performance.
Originally Elo Article
Within the provisional period for calculating Elo, for some reason a crude averaging system of the rating of opponents is used over 20 games by some sites. Apart from the obvious flawed logic that beating someone much weaker than you should not lose points and losing to someone much higher than you should not gain points, it should also be obvious to players in the UK that an alternative performance measurement system is already available — namely the English Chess Federation (ECF) grading system. The English Chess Federation grading system already accounts for cases where you beat someone much lower, by simply adding some points to your grade. And when you lose to someone much higher, you also some lose some points relative to your rating. Perhaps in a new model of Elo calculations, the English Chess Federation grading system could be used for the 1st 20-50 games in order to establish a stable Elo rating which is then subject to Elo's main formula relating to probability distribution. The problem though is how to convert from one system to the other. The ECF are aware that their rating system is suffering from hyper-deflation and are actively looking at fixes to correct this - one possibility being to switch to Elo.
I dunno about deflation in the ECF but ask anyone in the know what happened when the British Championship used to be open to players from the commonwealth. A rating whether USCF/ECF or FIDE is certainly an ornament of sorts there are about 10,000 players on the ECF list and about 70,000 on the FIDE list, leaving about 500,000 players unrated worldwide. (z00t's estimate)!
Originally Elo Article
The primary goal of ELO ratings is to accurately predict game results between contemporary competitors, and FIDE ratings perform this task relatively well. A secondary, more ambitious goal is to use ratings to compare players between different eras. (See also Greatest chess player of all time.) It would be convenient if a FIDE rating of 2500 meant the same thing in 2005 that it meant in 1975. If the ratings suffer from inflation, then a modern rating of 2500 means less than a historical rating of 2500, while if the ratings suffer from deflation, the reverse will be true. Unfortunately, even among people who would like ratings from different eras to "mean the same thing", intuitions differ sharply as to whether a given rating should represent a fixed absolute skill or a fixed relative performance.
Originally Elo Article
Within the provisional period for calculating Elo, for some reason a crude averaging system of the rating of opponents is used over 20 games by some sites. Apart from the obvious flawed logic that beating someone much weaker than you should not lose points and losing to someone much higher than you should not gain points, it should also be obvious to players in the UK that an alternative performance measurement system is already available — namely the English Chess Federation (ECF) grading system. The English Chess Federation grading system already accounts for cases where you beat someone much lower, by simply adding some points to your grade. And when you lose to someone much higher, you also some lose some points relative to your rating. Perhaps in a new model of Elo calculations, the English Chess Federation grading system could be used for the 1st 20-50 games in order to establish a stable Elo rating which is then subject to Elo's main formula relating to probability distribution. The problem though is how to convert from one system to the other. The ECF are aware that their rating system is suffering from hyper-deflation and are actively looking at fixes to correct this - one possibility being to switch to Elo.
I dunno about deflation in the ECF but ask anyone in the know what happened when the British Championship used to be open to players from the commonwealth. A rating whether USCF/ECF or FIDE is certainly an ornament of sorts there are about 10,000 players on the ECF list and about 70,000 on the FIDE list, leaving about 500,000 players unrated worldwide. (z00t's estimate)!
Back to Top