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

Under the surface

I did something different. I bought a chess book without doing any research. I decided to reward myself with a new book after having written ten reviews. So I asked my friends on Twitter for suggestions, and someone suggested that I take a look at the book Under the surface by Jan Markos. Since the book is quite new, I couldn't find much information about it, so I decided to blindly trust the recommendation. Luckily, I was not let down. What can you expect from this book? I am not the only one who has done something different. Jan Markos did the same when he wrote Under the surface . He takes a quite philosophical approach to chess, which should probably be expected from a former student of philosophy. This comes across quite clearly in his choice of chapter titles. The names "Magnetic Skin", "Anatoly Karpov's Billiard Balls" and "On the Breaking Ice" are not the most transparent chapter titles in the world. But once you get under the surfa

Tactics for post-scratch players

Which is the best chess book ever? As a chess community, we repeatedly ask this kind of question, for various categories. And one of those categories is, of course, tactics. So which is the best tactics book ever? The answer to this question depends on the playing strength of the reader. But if we consider the fact that the majority of chess players are in the middle of the bell curve, the best books should logically be among the ones written for an intermediate audience. With that said, this might be the best tactics book ever written. A bold statement, perhaps. Read on to find out why I recommend this book. 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? Chess tactics from scratch was originally published as Understanding Chess Tactics  – as indicated by the book's subtitle. This book is actually what inspired the now famous "woodpecker method". In his book Pu

Judgement and planning

Some books "fly under the radar" and do not get the same attention as the evergreen classics. But sometimes, there is gold in old mines. And I found a little golden nugget while shopping for used books. A book written for amateurs, by (arguably) the best amateur of all time; former world champion Max Euwe. Sounds promising, right? 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 my previous review of Chess Fundamentals , said that few world champions have written books for beginners and intermediate players. Capablanca is, of course, one exception. And another is Max Euwe. Euwe is not the most well-known world champion. He was in his prime in the 1930s and 1940s, most notably in 1935 when he dethroned none other than the great Alexander Alekhine. Although many have suggested that Alekhine only lost because of heavy use of alcohol, beating him is no small feat (rega

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

All by myself

How do I study chess in the most effective way? This is a question most chess players ask themselves at some point. Once in a while there comes a book that promises to deliver the definitive answer. And just a few months ago, such a book came out; How to study chess on your own . With such a title, this is a book that I just had to read. Should you read it too? In order to answer that, I think you should read this review and figure it out for yourself. 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? Like many other books, the first time I heard about How to study chess on your own  was on the perpetual chess podcast that featured an interview with author Davorin Kuljasevic . The interview made me curious about the book, so I decided to get it. How to study chess on your own  is a big book. It has 380 pages that spans 9 chapters (plus solutions), 71 annotated games and 34 tests o