Players getting stronger with age

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Brian Valentine
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:30 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Brian Valentine » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:36 am

Martin and Roger are correct in their observations and Martin is also correct about the long term effects.

The average grade of players (excluding category F) has been fairly stable. The highest mean was from that first recalibration at 133.7, the lowest was from the January 2014 list at 131.8, and the last list mean was 132.3. What has been happening is that the dispersion within the list has trended upwards; the standard deviation (including category F) from 36 to 46 now.

This is not to do with "stretch". The underperformance of the higher graded player in games between adults quickly re-emerged as has been pretty stable since.

What is happening is that new entrants have a higher dispersion than of those continuing and of those leaving. The standard deviation of new entrants has consistently been in the high 50s. A reasonable prediction is that the system will not settle down till the whole list reaches this level.

The implication being that each player graded above the mid 130s has has a little push upwards since the recalibration.

Brian Valentine
Manager of ECF Grading

Nick Ivell
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Nick Ivell » Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:22 am

I think Misha was kidding himself when he said the mature Tal would have beaten the younger version of himself. As we enter middle age we lose something indefinable. Call it drive, call it speed of thought, I'm struggling to put my finger on it. Yes, chess is an information-based activity, but there's more to it than that. There's the sporting aspect for a start. I can hardly think of a sport where people are better in their 40s than their 20s. A superannuated golfer may win the occasional major, but it's very much the exception.

I'm constantly amazed how little experience seems to count for in chess. How do these juniors get so good so quickly? On the rare occasions I play them these days, I feel that my experience counts for practically nothing.

I don't think Tal really believed what he said. It was a comforting illusion. As a young man he had the motivation and the speed of thought to beat anyone in the world, even the young Fischer. As an older man he was more solid and better in the endgame, but that's about it.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5206
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Apr 15, 2017 4:37 pm

Having said that Tal's form in both the early and late 70s was by any standards pretty impressive. IMO there was something in what he said.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Nick Burrows
Posts: 1705
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Nick Burrows » Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:43 pm

He was world no.3 around 1980

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5206
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Apr 15, 2017 7:05 pm

In the list produced at the end of 1979 IIRC.

He then dropped about 150 points (!) in a year - ill health, bereavements and other stuff.

Made a comeback from that of course, but never quite reached that level again.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Alex Longson
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Alex Longson » Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:28 pm

Keith Arkell wrote:
Some speak of rating inflation and some deflation. None can argue though with the fact that a few years ago the ECF had to take measures to combat deflation. It is easy to fall for the trap of believing that just because there are lots more 2700s around today than there were 30 years ago this is somehow proof of inflation. All it shows is that a lot of extremely strong players have emerged. There has been a worldwide chess explosion.

Furthermore, even those who argue for a modicum of inflation must surely accept that standards continue to rise. This is true of tennis, athletics, scientific knowledge and so on. How can chess, as an information based activity, be immune from the same pattern?
One area I'm particularly interested in at the moment is the balance between 'knowledge' and 'skill' - particularly in chess of course but also in more general terms. Certainly in chess it seems most training and coaching focus is on the accumulation of knowledge (openings, tactical patterns, endgames etc) and far less on developing, training and honing skills (calculation, practical decision making, manoevering etc).

Access to knowledge has increased exponentially and younger players now have a much broader arsenal than perhaos even the very top players of the past. And of course the 'old guard' (Anand, Kramnik, Adams, Gelfand et al) know more now than they did in their teens/twenties. I don't think this is particularly controversial - I recall amnand saying in an interview recently how he has had to forget a lot of the stuff he learnt when younger as computers have proved it wrong.

My hypotheses is that skill level hasn't increased significantly throughout the years and that training said skills should be much higher on the agenda when it comes to coaching and training. Furthermore, perhaps easy access to knowledge has dulled those competetive skills (speaking somewhat from experience here also). I'm genuinely interested in the subject so just throwing some thoughts into the mix. Efforts to objectively measure these aspects would be fascinating.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 3044
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by MartinCarpenter » Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:26 pm

I presume you've read the Rowson books which are basically about this :) (Chess for Zebra's + sequel.).

Training people for skill seem to take a huge commitment in terms of time & effort. It seemingly has to be really engaged effort too, and how many people can do that?

Neill Cooper
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Cumbria

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Neill Cooper » Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:58 pm

Alex Longson wrote:One area I'm particularly interested in at the moment is the balance between 'knowledge' and 'skill' - particularly in chess of course but also in more general terms. Certainly in chess it seems most training and coaching focus is on the accumulation of knowledge (openings, tactical patterns, endgames etc) and far less on developing, training and honing skills (calculation, practical decision making, manoevering etc).
As a maths teacher it is important that I focus on skill and not just knowledge. As an example, I could just teach GCSE students the knowledge of how to use the quadratic formula to solve all quadratic equations. But that would miss the benefits of learning the skills of factorising quadratics and completing the square, the latter being particularly valuable for A level maths and further maths.
My chess teaching is rather simpler, I teach very little and since they have little knowledge they have to learn the skills themselves. It seems to work quite well, and they certainly enjoy their chess.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:13 am

Neill Cooper wrote:. But that would miss the benefits of learning the skills of factorising quadratics and completing the square, the latter being particularly valuable for A level maths and further maths
As an example x squared + 4 x = 140 is or should be visually obvious as to the solution for x without resorting to b squared minus 4 a x etc.

John McKenna

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by John McKenna » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:51 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Neill Cooper wrote:. But that would miss the benefits of learning the skills of factorising quadratics and completing the square, the latter being particularly valuable for A level maths and further maths
As an example x squared + 4 x = 140 is or should be visually obvious as to the solution for x without resorting to b squared minus 4 a x etc.
For how many of his "personal friends" (+ve integers) was the solution to more advanced equations "visually obvious" to his mind's eye, I wonder?

Who was he?

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 3044
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by MartinCarpenter » Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:19 am

Well pedantically that one is easy because they are very few ways to get x^2 + 4x to end in zero!
(And the blindingly obvious candidate fits.).

Brian Towers
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Brian Towers » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:00 pm

John McKenna wrote:For how many of his "personal friends" (+ve integers) was the solution to more advanced equations "visually obvious" to his mind's eye, I wonder?

Who was he?
Ramanujan.

In "A Mathematician's Apology" Hardy tells a lovely (to fellow mathematicians) story of his visit to Ramanujan when he was on his death bed.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4818
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Apr 18, 2017 5:11 pm

n[sup]2[/sup]+4n ends in zero when and only when n leaves a remainder of 0 or 6 when divided by 10. Both solutions to the equation satisfy this rule.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1910
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by Roger Lancaster » Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:26 pm

Have to say, it took me a little thought (not overmuch, but a bit!) to get the second solution. Not sure I agree Jack's point.

John McKenna

Re: Players getting stronger with age

Post by John McKenna » Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:59 pm

"I have always thought of a mathematician as... an observer... who gazes at a distant range of mountains and notes down his observations." (G.H. Hardy)
"An equation means nothing to me unless it expresses a thought of God. (S. Ramanujan)
How ironic that fate threw together the English atheist and the Indian Brahman.
... n[sup]2[/sup]+4n ends in zero when and only when n leaves a remainder of 0 or 6 when divided by 10. Both solutions to the equation satisfy this rule.
I tend to agree with Roger L. since if n is a negative integer Jack's 'rule', above, seems to require that: n divided by 10 [i.e. n(mod 10)] leaves a remainder of 0 or -4.

E.g. try putting -4 and -14 into the expression n(n+4)

Further above I used a quote about the positive integers being Ramanujan's friends, as the story about the not so "dull number" (1729) - alluded to, above, by Brian T. implies.

See the following for details about 1729 and positive (and negative) cubes -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1729_(number)

As a final proof of Ramanujan's ageless greatness, his affinity for the positive integers (and that he was also at home with their negative counterparts) follow the link below to an article about interesting positive and negative numbers, 'mock' modular forms and black holes -

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... ns-genius/