Statistics in chess

[Alex Longson]

Does anyone know of any good sources of data/statistics regarding chess, particularly in the UK but worldwide also of use? I've found the download facilities on the FIDE site and ECF grading and membership portals useful - but I'd like to pull together a central resource which can be used to base future strategic decisions on.

I've been doing some digging looking at memberships and rating stats by age and gender in the UK and abroad with some interesting (if not altogether surprising) results. I'll post some findings here shortly if of interest to people.

One that stood out right away

ECF adult membership 97% male
ECF junior membership 81% male

[David Robertson]

I wish you luck.

A sober-minded and forsenic look at the community is much needed - and much avoided: key questions are not asked. You'll find without too much trouble that the mean age of the 97% ECF males is c. 54 years, and increasing progressively. This compares well with the mean age of croquet players of c. 67 years. I offer the comparison because the cohorts are not that dissimilar.

Moving on, we need to know very much more about participation by (a) ethnicity; (b) school background; (c) region; and (d) social class. The data as it stands may not be wholly helpful. But I've never heard anyone in ECF declare that these characteristics might be worthy of examination. The task isn't easy; some things may not be possible. But nothing will be possible unless the right question is asked

[Alex Longson]

I agree;

With a considered approach to data quality the ECF could make great strides here. FIDE also but that would require a larger coordinated effort across the federations. It wouldn't be too expensive for example for Experian (or other data company) to run a profile analysis of the membership - they would just need name, DOB and address which is presumably captured.

There is no D.O.B info on publicly available information on the ECF site (from what I can see) but there is on the FIDE ratings download. Average age of active ENG FIDE rated players is 44 (female 32, male 45) which is somewhat high (China 21 !) though I suspect this isn't representative of typical chess player profile!

If you know of any data scientists with an interest in chess (or just looking for a side project) please refer them (long shot I know)!

[Roger de Coverly]

I though I suspect this isn't representative of typical chess player profile!

It depends what you mean by a typical chess player profile. Look around at a Congress, league match or 4NCL, particularly the lower divisions.

Chess was popular and organised in the more academic schools from around 1950 (?) to 1990. That drives the profile of lifelong active players as measured by the ECF grading list and those who also appear on the FIDE list. The massive expansion in the 1970s before and after the 1972 Fischer match can still be seen in the demographics to this day.

[Mick Norris]

I agree;

With a considered approach to data quality the ECF could make great strides here. FIDE also but that would require a larger coordinated effort across the federations. It wouldn't be too expensive for example for Experian (or other data company) to run a profile analysis of the membership - they would just need name, DOB and address which is presumably captured.

There is no D.O.B info on publicly available information on the ECF site (from what I can see) but there is on the FIDE ratings download. Average age of active ENG FIDE rated players is 44 (female 32, male 45) which is somewhat high (China 21 !) though I suspect this isn't representative of typical chess player profile!

If you know of any data scientists with an interest in chess (or just looking for a side project) please refer them (long shot I know)!

Alex

Very good luck; if the MCF can help in any way please let me know

We have a lot of connections with Manchester University, so that would be an obvious place to start; when I was MCFPresdient, I was approached by someone there looking into something chess related, although of course I can't remember now exactly what

[MartinCarpenter]

One thing you can do very easily is check who is playing games for given leagues in terms of whether they're new - and also if this newness is to chess, or just to the area in question - and whether they've been playing chess for say 5,10,15 etc years.

That immediately gives you some idea of the current new player recruitment rate for the various leagues. I did that roughly for the Yorkshire league recently and it wasn't very pretty. 95 6-10 yr veterans (many 20+!), 16 from the last 3-5 and 24 'new'. Of the 24 new 15 were moving into the area/starting playing on Saturdays rather than just evening league chess. Most of the remaining 9 were students.

So I guess we're getting perhaps one genuinely new player/year into the league at present.

As for how fast we need to replace players, well I'm still just <40, but I'm definitely in the younger 1/3 of the league, and realistically we'll need to replace the bulk of the current league in a 15-20 time span. The Manchester league, outside 3C's of course!, is much the same I'd think.

Somewhere between daunting and deeply unrealistic. The demographics for bridge, by the way, are quite spine chilling. A lot of that down to people picking it up post retirement though.

[Mick Norris]

There are 66 "new" players in the Manchester League this season

The returning/established players that I recognise are Scoular (Worsley), Furness (Urmston), Parrotta & Beardsworth (Stockport); I guess most of the 3Cs, Ashton, Bolton, players are juniors; as always, Chorlton seems to have gained a few (and presumably lost a few too?)

In total, there are 71 juniors who have actually played in this or past seasons, as against 460 non-juniors (I'm not sure if John Upham can produce an average age for the league, or age bands?)

[Matt Mackenzie]

I wish you luck.

A sober-minded and forsenic look at the community is much needed - and much avoided: key questions are not asked. You'll find without too much trouble that the mean age of the 97% ECF males is c. 54 years, and increasing progressively

This seems very plausible to me, but what is your data source given that the grading website doesn't make DOBs publicly available?

[IM Jack Rudd]

I wish you luck.

A sober-minded and forsenic look at the community is much needed - and much avoided: key questions are not asked. You'll find without too much trouble that the mean age of the 97% ECF males is c. 54 years, and increasing progressively

This seems very plausible to me, but what is your data source given that the grading website doesn't make DOBs publicly available?

The membership database, presumably.

[MartinCarpenter]

There are 66 "new" players in the Manchester League this season

The returning/established players that I recognise are Scoular (Worsley), Furness (Urmston), Parrotta & Beardsworth (Stockport); I guess most of the 3Cs, Ashton, Bolton, players are juniors; as always, Chorlton seems to have gained a few (and presumably lost a few too?)

In total, there are 71 juniors who have actually played in this or past seasons, as against 460 non-juniors (I'm not sure if John Upham can produce an average age for the league, or age bands?)

Much better than I'd got the impression of from just seeing Division 1 then, which is perhaps no surprise. The Yorkshire league Div 1 is a basically junior free right now, maybe a few lower down. Some students though.

Chorlton have no doubt had a few come and go as people come into/leave Manchester.

[David Robertson]

I wish you luck.

A sober-minded and forsenic look at the community is much needed - and much avoided: key questions are not asked. You'll find without too much trouble that the mean age of the 97% ECF males is c. 54 years, and increasing progressively

This seems very plausible to me, but what is your data source given that the grading website doesn't make DOBs publicly available?

Plausible because it's true - at least, that's what Dave Thomas stated in a membership report to Finance Council (April 2016; item 24.7). Alex Longson may find it a modest starting point.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Moving on, we need to know very much more about participation by (a) ethnicity; (b) school background; (c) region; and (d) social class."

OK, I'll bite. Why?

[David Williams]

"Moving on, we need to know very much more about participation by (a) ethnicity; (b) school background; (c) region; and (d) social class."

OK, I'll bite. Why?

Presumably so that we do not waste resources on a futile attempt to interest those who are never going to play, and concentrate on encouraging those sections of society that the game does appeal to.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

"Moving on, we need to know very much more about participation by (a) ethnicity; (b) school background; (c) region; and (d) social class."

OK, I'll bite. Why?

Presumably so that we do not waste resources on a futile attempt to interest those who are never going to play, and concentrate on encouraging those sections of society that the game does appeal to.

That will surely entrench existing biases, rather than promote diversity. I suspect the person who originally suggested looking at this data, wanted to widen the appeal of chess, the opposite to what you are suggesting. None of the four factors listed should affect whether you play chess, given the opportunity, and where there are barriers to participation, those barriers should be broken down.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Presumably so that we do not waste resources ....

That will surely entrench existing biases ...

I fear you may have missed David W's point (and tone) Chris