Skip to main content

What is average anyway?

The term 'average chess player' comes up every now and again. But what does that even mean? I am sure that every person who has ever used that kind of term will have different interpretations of what it means. So I figured I would take a look at some statistics from the official FIDE rating list.

The official rating lists can be downloaded from the FIDE website. One problem, however, is that there are almost 350,000 players on the rating list, which makes the files so big that they are rather difficult to handle. But with some spreadsheet magic, I was able to extract the information.

The diagram below shows the rating distribution of all players on the official rating list. The diagram simply shows the number of players with a certain rating. I have used a quite wide range (100 points) for each category, so the numbers will indicate the number of players with a rating between the indicated number and 100 points higher. For instance, the number at the peak (rating = 1700) is approximately 35,000. This means that about 35,000 players have a rating between 1700 and 1800.

Distribution of all FIDE rated players
One thing that strikes me as a bit odd is the lack of symmetry in the diagram. I had expected something that more closely resembles the symmetrical bell curve that represents a normal distribution. The deviation is more or less completely concentrated in below a 1400 rating. I am not really sure how to interpret this, but one possible explanation could be that there are a lot of beginners who have not yet reached their full potential, and therefore have a rating below 1400. Please feel free to provide your own interpretation of this result. (Edit: The results differs quite a bit from a similar analysis from a few years ago. Makes me think there could be something wrong with the data.)

The vertical lines in the diagram indicate the approximate rating levels that divide the population in quarters (quartiles). Approximately 25% of the players have ratings between each vertical line. The line in the middle thereby indicates the median, which means that 50% of the players have a lower rating, and 50% have a higher rating. This is quite close to the average rating, which indicates that the distribution is quite symmetrical after all. The following statistics describe the distribution quite well.

Average rating1670
Median rating1680
Variance (estimated)250

This means that an average player is someone with a rating just below 1700. And if you have a rating that is above 2000, you can proudly announce that you have a higher rating than about 75% of all players. That's quite an achievement. If you want to take a closer look at the grandmaster level (2500+), this is a quite exclusive group with a mere 0.3% of the players. The table below provides some more details.

Rating Number of players Percentage
1000174015%
1100 21902 6%
1200 23876 7%
1300 25723 7%
1400 28172 8%
1500 30958 9%
1600 33330 10%
1700 34483 10%
1800 33743 10%
1900 30758 9%
2000 28394 8%
2100 20109 6%
2200 12202 3%
2300 5564 2%
2400 2201 1%
2500 703 0.2%
2600 227 0.1%
2700 35 0.01%
2800 4 0.001%

This table illustrates clearly what an incredible achievement it really is to become a grandmaster. Despite the awesomeness that this implies, it is not always enough to make a living from chess. Furthermore, the chess celebreties that we see in top tournament (2700+) are only about 1 in 10,000. Talk about exclusive!

Another conclusion that I draw from this analysis is that it provides some kind of confirmation of my notion that an average clubplayer (patzer) is someone in the 1400-2000 rating range. Below 1400 is probably a good indication of the 'beginner' level, and 2000+ is elite. The master level is something else altogether.
I hope you enjoyed this little statistics exposé. At least, the next time someone talks about an 'average' player, you will know exactly what that means.

Comments

Popular reviews

Not only for kids

Do you read children's books? If you're and adult, you will probably steer clear of any book that has the phrase "for kids" in it. Since it's for kids, and you're not a kid. Right? Well there are some exceptions, and this is one of them. Author Jeff Coakley has written a number of books "for kids": Winning chess strategy for kids , Winning chess exercises for kids and Winning chess puzzles for kids (vol 1 and 2). Although the titles suggest otherwise, these books are highly instructive and useful for players of all ages. In this review, I have chosen to focus on the first book in his series, Winning chess strategy for kids . What can you expect from this book? Immediately when seeing this book, you will realize that there is one major feature that is "for kids", and that is the artwork. Apart from that, there is no reason to assume that this book cannot be used for adult improvers. I used this book as a part of my tactics training p...

Estimating playing strength

Have you ever felt like your chess rating doesn't represent your actual playing strength? Sometimes we want to be able to estimate playing strength based on individual games rather than rating (which changes more slowly). During the past few months, I've been taking a number of online courses and learning python for data analysis. In one of the courses, the final project allowed me to choose my own dataset. So surprise surprise! I chose something chess related. (Not really surprised, are you?) When we play games online, getting a computer evaluation is just a few clicks away. And a commonly used statistic is the average centipawn loss, or simply the average deviation from the computer's best move. Many of us tend to think that centipawn loss (CPL) is a good estimate of playing strength. And, of course, it gives some indication, but it's far from a perfect predictor. Fellow chess/statistics blogger Patrick Coulombe has investigated the correlation between rating and CPL ...

Winning chess strategies

Chess strategy is one of the most elusive and difficult parts of chess. Compared to the direct and transparent world of chess tactics, strategy can be confusing and opaque. At the patzer level, tactical strikes that gain material or lead to checkmate can be obvious (provided that one understands the tactic). However, in many cases, strong players claim that a move is obvious although it doesn't result in material gain or even a semblance of an attack. We, the patzers of the world, scratch our heads and wonder how on earth anyone can find such moves obvious. How can we take steps towards this deeper level of chess understanding? Picking up a basic strategy book is a good first step. And that's what I did here. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from this book? As a part of my ambition to deepen my understanding of chess strategy, I took on a mission of reading (and rev...

Reassess your chess

Some books don't really need an introduction. And this is one of them. But a blog post needs one, so here we are, in the middle of an introduction. How to reassess your chess was one of the first books in my collection. I first read it around 2014, and decided to reread it this year. And now I am finally ready share my thoughts on it with you. I hope you enjoy my review! If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from this book? In the beginning of my chess studies, I read The Amateur's Mind and saw a tremendous increase of my chess understanding. My playing strength increased dramatically and I felt more confident than ever. I also enjoyed Silman's writing style, so I felt that it was a good idea to take a deeper look at what he had to offer. Considering the amount of praise that can be found (basically everywhere) of How to reassess your chess , I felt that this was a no...

Master of strategy

During the past two years, I’ve been working on improving my strategic/positional play. In this process, I have read a number of books, and two books that have long been on my reading list are the strategy books by Johan Hellsten. So when the Swedish chess federation requested reviewers for two of these books, I didn’t hesitate. I am happy that I was given the opportunity to review these books, and hope this review can be of help to you as a reader. If you like these reviews, please consider supporting my work. Visit my patreon page for details. Become a Patron! What can you expect from these books? Johan Hellsten has created a name for himself as one of the leading experts of chess strategy in modern times. His series of strategy books ( Mastering Opening Strategy , Mastering Chess Strategy and Mastering Endgame Strategy ) have received glowing reviews from many parts of the chess world. So it feels good to finally dig into these nuggets. His endgame book is still in my boo...