FIDE Sparks Backlash With Controversial Rating Rule Change

The chess world has erupted into heated debate after FIDE (the International Chess Federation) officially implemented a major change to the Elo rating system—one that many top-level players say could reshape how elite grandmasters plan their tournament schedules. Starting October 1, 2025, FIDE removed the long-standing “400-point rule” for players rated 2650 Elo and above, a category covering roughly 70 of the world’s strongest grandmasters. What was the 400-point rule? Under the older system, if the rating gap between two players exceeded 400 points, Elo calculations would treat the difference as if it were only 400 points. This protected elite players from losing too many points when playing far weaker opponents—and also made it easier to gain small rating boosts through frequent wins. Now, for super-GMs above 2650, that safety net is gone. Their results will be calculated using the true rating difference, even if the gap is 500 points or more. Why is it controversial? The change immediately triggered controversy because many believe it creates a dangerous imbalance: Winning against weaker players becomes nearly pointless, giving very small rewards But drawing or losing becomes far more punishing, causing rating drops that can seriously damage rankings Critics argue it discourages elite players from participating in open tournaments, playing emerging juniors, or joining events with mixed rating fields—because the risk becomes too high for too little benefit. Some voices in the community also accused FIDE of “stealing rating points,” claiming the change essentially forces top players into “rating traps” where their careers become less stable and their ratings more volatile. The Nakamura factor The controversy grew even louder after reports that the change was “triggered by Hikaru Nakamura,” who had been actively playing events as part of his push for Candidates qualification. While FIDE has not officially framed it as a reaction to any one player, chess media coverage widely connected the decision to concerns about top players “farming rating” through carefully selected opposition. FIDE’s position: fairness and integrity FIDE defended the change by saying it is intended to protect the fairness and integrity of the rating system at the highest level, ensuring that top players’ ratings reflect real performance more accurately. Supporters of the rule update say it discourages easy rating gains and helps stop elite players from selectively seeking lower-rated opponents for “safe” points. What happens next? Whether the new system improves chess or causes unintended damage remains to be seen. But one thing is already clear: This rule change has divided the chess world into two camps—those who see it as long overdue modernization, and those who see it as a risky move that punishes activity and transparency at the top. And with the Candidates race and world championship cycles always looming, the effects of this “small adjustment” may end up reshaping elite tournament strategy for years.