70 CHESS November 15th 1968 November 15th 1968 CHESS 71

II; Z. C. Esad Yugoslavia I0£ etc. (8competed).

Junior and Second Class Second

Professor Elo writes:

Here is the latest IGM rating or gradinglist which I prepared for presentation at theFIDE meeting in October at Lugano. Theratings given are to be construed as averagesover the indicated 28 month period. Un-fortunately I cannot supply what would be'current' ratings as so far I have been unableto obtain tournament and match reports inchronological order and within a reasonabletime after the respective events. FIDE haddirected its membership to send me reports;however, the response to the directive wasnegligible; absolutely zero from behind theiron curtain.

A single important factor which casts adoubt over the validity of a ranking list suchas this, regardless of what type of gradingsystem is used, is the prevalance of the 'grand

Week: 1-2 D. J. Frew Che/msford andM. J. Warden Kettering 4 etc. (Ten com-peted).

master draw'. Among the top ranked playersonly Fischer, Botvinnik and Larsen had moregames played to a decision than draws. Evensuch fighting players as Korchnoy, Tal andPortisch played more than 50% of theirgames to draws. And how can any systemtruly evaluate Spassky's performance whenhe played 91 draws in 129 grand mastergames? One could paraphrase an oft quotedsaying here: "the fault is not our system butin our masters"— and the way they play.At that, a grading system, even at the grandmaster level, could serve a useful purpose.Grand masters may pretend to be abovesuch things as rating systems but the truth isthat they are as vain about their ratings asthe duffers. If they understood that drawscould adversely affect their ratings we mightsee fewer perfunctory draws in grandmaster play.

The performances of the International Grand Masters over the period January 1966 throughApril 1968. Included on the list are all the F.I.D.E. grand masters as of October 22, 1967 anda few international masters who, by statistical criteria, have performed at the grand masterlevel. The won-lost-draw records of the players are against the other players on this list only.The ratings of the players represent their average performances over the indicated period.i ne ugurva are IUUMUV

NomeFischer U.S.ABotvinnik U.S.S.R.Korchnoy U.S.S.R.Spassky U.S.S.R.Larsen DenmarkPetroshan U.S.S.R.Tal U.S.S.RGeller U.S.S.R.Smyslov U.S.S.R.Polugayevsky U.S.S.R.Portisch HungaryShtein U.S.S.R.Unzicker W. GermanyBronstein U.S.S.R.Keres U.S.S.R.Kholmov U S S R .Lutikov U.S.S.R.Boleslavsky U S S RGligoric YugoslaviaNajdorf ArgentinaOlafsson IcelandBenko U.S.AGipslis U.S.S.R.

J bW LI 1C

Won

2514362952242527231534276

125

1074

268469

ii ecu cat. cci

Lost73

109

26II9

1477

2317

174552

2210244

31 UV.C gi ca

Drew18155491416445696537835733323333194

78287

3249

LCI pi BfelBIWII

Per CentScore.680.674.630.578.609.565.602.558.584.567.540.550.563.550.515.552.532.600.515.478.577.523.540

v-iu HIV/I! wa bia

CompetitionAverage

25842575256326022575260225702590257025622580257225702565259325642580258025732605258025562550

Rating onJ.S.C.F. Scale

2710269026602660265026502650263026302610'26102610261026002600260026002590 * *259025902590 * *25802580

NomeKrogius U.S.S.R.Reshevsky U.S.A.Taimanov U.S.S.R.Darga W. GermanyFurman U.S.S.R.Hort Czechoslovak/a . .Lein U.S.S.RAntoshin U.S.S.R.Evans U.S.AGufeld U.S.S.R.Ivkov YugoslaviaMatulovic Yugoslavia . .Zaitsev U.S.S.R.Matanovic YugoslaviaMecking BrazilOsnos U.S.S.R.Savon U.S.S.R.Vasyukov U.S.S.R.Averbakh U.S.S.R.Bobotsov BulgariaPan no ArgentinaParma YugoslaviaShamkovich U.S.S.R. . .Bilek HungaryCiric YugoslaviaDonner HollandPachman CzechoslovakiaSuetin U.S.S.R.Uhlmann E.. Germany . .Gheorghiu Rumania . .R. Byrne U.S.A.Kavalek CzechoslovakiaPomar SpainSzabo HungaryFilip CzechoslovakiaKotov U S S RLiberzon U.S.S.R.Pilnik ArgentinaL. Schmid W. GermanySimagin U.S.S.R.Barcza HungaryEliskases ArgentinaTrifunovic Yugoslavia . .Janosevic Yugoslavia . .Barczay HungaryPadevsky BulgariaTringov BulgariaLengyel HungaryYanofsky CanadaO'Kelly BelgiumDamjanovic YugoslaviaPietzsch E. Germany . .

Won

98

1332

16II10

17

19257

1065663821

II8

101479

1087

1659354329811

1264321064

tost

5101230

127716

2422

31286775

1322

12131527121417161520101873

835

151532

2417139

105

123021

Drew334534126

7332151518

112509

82101917221054II242869665857304557284818524110II2

14263046

28412725348

253029

Per CentScore.543.485.508.500.625.519.540.546.500.516.483.515.605.490.458.482.482.485.444.467.500.481.490.472.472.435.466.453.450.450.420.475.424.443.442414,̂ JT

.412

.500

.428

.440

.434

.375

.444

.407

.414

.398

.418

.413

.356

.338

.318

.342

Compet/tionAverage

25502584257025752550256025482530257425502565255025442557257025652566256325602560253825512548255025502570255425652560256525752545257325502548~r *f.

2570256025532548254325602540254525402550254025342580254625502535

Rating onU.S.C.F. Scale

2580258025802570 * *2570 * *2570257025602560 * *2560256025602560 * *255025502550255025502540**25402540 * *25402540253025302530253025302530253025202520252025202510~_ . _. . .

2510**2510**2510**251025002500 * *2500 * *249024802480248024702470 * *243024202420

Ratings marked by asterisks * * are in part basedavailable sample of the performance over the 1966-68ratings constitute a self-consistent set.

on performances prior to 1966 since theperiod was less than 30 games. All other

ARPAD E. ELO