Elo's book, The Rating of Chess Players, Past and Present, is
reprinted today.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0923891277

Professor Elo's book long out of print and almost impossible to obtain
has just been reprinted, with a foreward by Sam Sloan.


On Apr 24, 8:30 am, samsloan wrote:
TheRatingofChessPlayers, Past & Present by ArpadElo

Introduction

ArpadElowas one of the giants of the World ofChess. Born in 1903,
he got off to a slow start, learning the rules ofchessby reading the
Encyclopedia Britannica in his high school library. By 1935, he was
Wisconsin State Champion, a title he won eight times.

In 1939, ArpadElowas one of the seven founding members of the United
StatesChessFederation. His signature is on the original USCF
corporate charter, dated December 27, 1939.

In the late-1930s, the firstchessratingsystem was developed by the
CorrespondenceChessLeague of America. In the early 1940s,Chess
Review magazine developed a system for its postalchessprogram.
Kenneth Harkness was the managing editor ofChessReview and, after he
left in 1948, he spent two years developing aratingsystem for over
the board play.

The original Harkness System forms the starting point for allchessratingsystems used in the world today. Under the original Harkness
System, every player who got an even score of 6-6 in the US Open of
was assigned aratingof 2000. The ratings of otherplayerswere
calculated from that starting point.Playersabove 2100 were experts
andplayersabove 2300 were masters.

Harkness unveiled his system in 1950. The first NationalChessRating
List was published in the December 1950 issue ofChessReview
magazine, page 354. The first list covered 2306playersand 582
tournaments covering a 30 year period ending on July 31, 1950.

Almost from the start, there were problems. In the early lists,
everybody'sratingwent down as new improvingplayerstookrating
points away from the older establishedplayers. By 1956, the standards
had to be reduced. The requirement for expert was dropped to 2000 and
the requirement for master was dropped to 2200. It remains there
today.

In 1957, Kenneth Harkness published his book, The Blue Book
Encyclopedia ofChess, which has recently been reprinted, which
explained hisratingsystem in detail.

In the late 1950s, a new crisis arose with the rise of Bobby Fischer.
Under the Harkness System, if a player lost a game to a much lower
rated player, he could lose as much as 70 or 80ratingpoints in that
one game. Also, there were long intervals betweenratinglists, at
least six months sometimes as long as one year. A player'sratingwas
only updated when the new list came out. Thus, if a player was rated
1700, he was considered still to be rated 1700 until the next list
came out and the gains and losses of the ratings of his opponents were
calculated on that basis.

During this period, theratingof Bobby Fischer rose from 1700 to 2400
in only two years. Every time Fischer, rated 1700, beat an expert
rated 2000, the higher rated player lost about 80ratingpoints in
that one game. This caused a lot ofplayersto become upset at losing
all theseratingpoints, especially after it became apparent that
Fischer was really a grandmaster, and not a Class B player. There were
bitter complaints about this.

In 1959, USCF President Jerry Spann appointed a committee headed by
ArpadEloto study theratingsystem and make recommendations to
change the system to avoid the decimation that Fischer had wrecked on
the ratings of so manyplayers.

In August, 1960,Elosubmitted his report at the USCF Delegate's
meeting in St. Louis. He had developed a formula that emulated the
results of the existing Harkness System. Among the changes were a
reduction on what is now known as the K-Factor. Under the Harkness
System, if a player lost a game to an opponent with the samerating,
he could lose 50 points. Under theEloSystem, he would only lose 16
points. Also, the most that a player could lose in a single game was
only 30 points, no matter how low rated the opponent was. Finally,
each tournament was rated in succession, with theratingafter one
tournament applied to the next, so that theratingof a player would
go up or down gradually, not in big jumps.

I was the delegate from Virginia at the USCF meeting in St. Louis in
1960 that approved adoption of the newEloSystem. I was the only
delegate who voted against it. I voted against it because I did not
like the fact that under the newEloSystem, theratingof a player
would go up more slowly. Being a kid myself, I wanted for myratingto
go up quickly.

By the 1970s, ProfessorElowas regularly attending the annual
meetings of FIDE, the WorldChessFederation. By then, the USCF was
running its ownratingsystem andElowas no longer involved except as
an advisor. However,Elohad developed a similar system forrating
InternationalPlayersat the grandmaster level.Elo'spersonalrating
list of the top 65playersin the world was published in the October
1969 issue ofChessLife magazine and was similarly published in other
magazines around the world. Here is his initial list.

At the 1970 FIDE Congress in in Siegen, West Germany, ProfessorElo
got FIDE to agree to adopt hisEloRatingSystem as the official FIDE
System. It was an easy sell, becauseElohimself would calculate the
ratings on his own adding machine at his home. Thus, FIDE did not have
to spend any money on it.

There was a big difference with the USCF System, in that under the
FIDE System as calculated by ProfessorElo, only the ratings of the
top level eliteplayerswere calculated. Under the USCF system, all
tournamentplayershad ratings. Under the FIDE System, a male player
had to be a master, meaning that he had to be able to hold aratingof
2205 or better. Otherwise, he was not listed.

Thus, onElo'sannual lists, only a few hundredplayershad ratings.
The 1969 list only had 375playerslisted. This included all the
grandmasters and international masters in the world who had played in
at least two tournaments in the past two years.

Elowas involved in a number of controversies, principally with his
nemesis Bill Goichberg. Goichberg was hired in 1964 by the USCF to be
its first full-timerating-statistician. AlthoughElohad developed
the theory of how the system should work, it was up to Goichberg to
put it into practice.

In 1967, when the USCF moved from New York City to Newburgh New York,
Goichberg did not move with it and instead became a big tournament
organizer. In the mid-1970s Goichberg started organizing FIDE Rated
Tournaments for the specific purpose of helping Americanplayersget
FIDE Ratings. Since almost all top level tournaments were being held
in Europe, it was nearly impossible for an American to get a FIDEratingwithout traveling to Europe, because in order to get a FIDERatingone generally needed to play nine games againstplayerswho
already had FIDE ratings.

As FIDE Ratings became more popular, the number of ratedplayers
increased. By the July 1, 1983 FIDE list, 3600 men and 720 women had
FIDE Ratings. Because there were far fewer top womenplayers, women's
ratings were as low as 1805 whereas men had to have a minimumrating
of 2205.

By that time, ProfessorElowas no longer doing the ratings at home
alone. One reason for this was that so manyplayershad ratings that
one man could not do all the work.

Another reason was because of a disputes between ArpadEloand William
Goichberg, organizer of many FIDE Rated tournaments. At a time when
less than 600playersin the world had FIDE ratings, Bill Goichberg
started an aggressive program to qualify USplayersfor FIDE ratings.
Typically, his tournaments were ten player round robins with fourplayerswho already had FIDE ratings, the minimum number necessary to
qualify a player for a partial FIDERating. However, it happened by
pure chance that Bill Goichberg, normally a 2350 player, had the best
tournament of his life and scored a 2530 tournament performance. In
another event, Michael Valvo, a strong player who had been inactive,
came out of retirement and produced a performance of 2440. Those who
knew Valvo knew that this was a typical result for him, but ArpadElo
had never heard of Valvo and thought that this result was suspicious.

The result was that Goichberg submitted tournament results showing
that he had earned a 2530 FIDEratingand Michael Valvo had earned a
2440rating. ProfessorElohad never heard of Valvo, but he knew
Goichberg well, due to the many disputes and disagreements between
Goichberg andEloin 1964-67 when Goichberg was therating
statistician working in the New York office andEloin Wisconsin was
overseeing his work.

ArpadElodid not believe any of this. He thought that this was all a
fix. Therefore,Elorefused to rate these events and to give Goichberg
his 2530ratingand Valvo his 2440rating. Goichberg complained,
pointing out that if some unknown Russian or unknown Yugoslav had
produced these results,Elowould have awarded these ratings without
question, sinceEloknew that there were manyplayersin Russia and
Eastern Europe who were very strong and had not been allowed to
compete internationally.

The showdown came at a FIDE meeting in 1977 in Israel. USCF FIDE
Delegate, Executive Director and Lieut. Col. Edmund B. Edmondson
(1920-1982) protested to FIDE thatElowas biased, refusing to give
ratings that had been earned by Americanplayerswho also had USCF
ratings, while readily giving ratings to Soviet or Hungarianplayers.
At that meeting,Elowas instructed to follow the rules, but when the
July 1977ratinglist came out,Elohad done the same things again.
FIDE President Max Euwe then arranged a meeting in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin between Edmondson,Eloand Euwe. At that meeting, the three
went over every disputedrating.Elofinally said that he would comply
with FIDE rules and ultimately he did.

At the 1978 WorldChessOlympiad in Buenos Aires, Argentina, news of
what had happened reached the General Assembly of FIDE. There was a
big controversy involving Valvo'sratingand the fact that these
changes had been made. Manyplayersobjected to this behind-the-scenes
deal.