FIDE Rating System flawed?

Hi All,

what do you think about the current FIDE rating system?

My personal view is that this rating worked fine about 20 years ago, when there was no players with ratings below 2000. When FIDE unleashed the ratings below 2000 (money was the only reason) the bad things started to happen - basically nowadays FIDE ratings mean nothing. 

You can have a rising junior with rating 1500 and senior player with rating 2000 and basically any three results are possible. And the player with higher rating is in the worse position, assuming the same strength of the players but difference in the rating. 

Therefore an improvement for this ill system could be introduction of GLICKO-2 or Universal Rating System, but FIDE has no interest in doing so (again - money). 

Please post your comments what are your thoughts on this topic - maybe you have similar observations? 

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Resolution for this problem would be introduction of the Glicko-2 system, which would be way more fair then the FIDE rating (I'm not calling it ELO for purpose). Should FIDE use Glicko-2 for rating evaluation, you would progress from 1500 to 2000 in 5-6 games (instead of 50 or so) and your opponents wouldn't lose much rating points, even if they were 2000 and you rising 1500 (providing they play regularly and have their ratings stabilized). In other words individual player's rating variation wouldn't be high.

To summarize:

1. In my opinion FIDE Rating sucks and is totally unfair for the players with stabilized ratings.

2. FIDE unleashed the ratings below 2000 in early years of this century - they did it for money (more ELO players = more $$ for FIDE moneybox), but they didn't care (and still don't) about introducing the fair rating system.

20 years back, when the ratings started from 2000 they meant something. It was obvious that a player 2200 was way better than player with rating 2000, but now player 2000 and player 1500 can both play the same strength.

3. The only cure for the current ill situation is introduction of Glicko-2 or Universal Rating System as a new FIDE rating, but FIDE doesn't care.

Personally,i don't think they can do anything. Plus, if that rising junior is 1500, he will get higher once he plays a bunch of games

I don't think you understand the ongoing discussion. The point is that I don't care about the junior 1500, but about the unfair treatment of the higher rated players with stabilized rating.

And I don't know why you think that they cannot do anything - FIDE is the governing body, they make the regulations. So yes - they can do anything, but they don't want to.

Could you please elaborate? What isn't true statistically?

That's the whole point. Glicko-2 works fine on online platforms and is much more fair than FIDE rating system. The only reason why FIDE is not willing introduce rating systems like Glicko or Universal Rating System is the money they don't want to invest, because they don't care.

Why absurd?

Yes, the FIDE system is different from Glicko-2, but it has its own in-built measures to track Juniors, Provisional ratings, etc. The FIDE system is more nuanced than it was a couple of generations ago.

Fide ratings for me means nothing, absolutely nothing! Until rating 2300!

In example I am a chess master level player but my Fide very low, why? I am very stressed before tournaments and never sleep well. When I played friendly games in the park with FM after a good night sleep and relaxed I smashed him! So obviously my chess understanding is through the roof. I just don't bring it to those nonsense tournaments. There are also not enough proper tournaments to prove yourself, maybe a tournament per month if you have the time and money to attend it due to work family limitations. 50 games in Fide compared to 100000 games in chess com. No brainer what is the correct statistics and what is a total nonsense!

@11

"50 games in Fide compared to 100000 games in chess com."
++ 1 classical time control game > 2000 speed games