FIDE Cracks Down on rating games
In a post titled “FIDE Council approves targeted amendment to Rating Regulation”, FIDE has shared its efforts to curtail the avenues travelled by, most recently, Hikaru Nakamura.
Applied to players rated 2650 and above, which FIDE estimates to affect 70 Grandmasters, they write an updated regulation as follows, effective October 1st:
“8.3.1 For each game played against a rated player, determine the difference in rating between the player and their opponent, D.
A difference in rating of more than 400 points shall be counted for rating purposes as though it were a difference of 400 points, for players rated below 2650. For players rated 2650 and above, the difference between ratings shall be used in all cases.”
Mathematically, this means that games between players more than 400 points apart can offer the higher-rated player less than the +0.8 points they would currently earn for a win as per the 2024 amendment to cap at a difference of 400 points for rating purposes.
Observers quickly pointed out that it will not impact Nakamura’s Candidates qualification, as his recent endeavours have been about playing a sufficient number of games rather than gaining rating, though it does eliminate the small chance of him collecting enough +0.8 results to pass Magnus for the World #1 ranking.
The biggest concerns were with regards to rating deflation, where Grandmasters would return to a gradual decline in rating when they play games with nothing to gain, only to lose. Among Grandmaster critics, David Howell had the sharpest words, writing on Twitter that the change was “Very short-sighted,” and that it “creates far worse negative consequences. Similar to previous FIDE changes,” while also expressing his concern for his 2650-2700 colleagues who fall below the very top level and have to play in Open tournaments — including some games against much lower-rated players — to make a living. He also argued “This new rule protects the top players, and will increase inequality further down,” as the top 10-20 players largely play in a ‘closed’ system amongst each other.
Other commenters including Srinath Narayanan and Anish Giri referenced a future implementation of ‘rating decay’, whereby a player can slowly lose points through inactivity and is thus required to play to maintain a rating.
And, Daniel Naroditsky and Oleksandr Bortnyk raised an alarm on a secondary effect. Bortnyk, on Twitter, wrote: “FIDE JUST STOLE MY RATING! How can they go back in time and take all my ratings? Absurd!” including screenshots that his blitz rating had suddenly dropped from 2793 to 2759 over the last day. Naroditsky expanded on Reddit, noting his own sudden drop from 2730 to 2705, and concluding:
“To be clear, I have always been ready to accept and respect the 400-point rule, if it would be implemented. In fact, while I won’t participate in a discussion of the pros and cons, I find the arguments in favor this rule quite compelling, and would add that my participation in local events has nothing to do with perceived minor rating gain. My issue is with the retroactive application of a rule. Imagine if Chess.com banned me, or Hikaru, or Magnus, for looking at chat during Titled Tuesday – three years ago, on the basis that we couldn’t predict that one day, doing so would be against the rules. I think most of us would find that intuitively objectionable.”
You can read the full post by FIDE here.
