Since i have nothing better to do i decided to calculate total number of classical lichess players.
Since i'm the 1407th in classical, which according to lichess is better than 95.2% of classical players, i formulated the following equation:
(x-1407)/x= 95.2/100
solving this i got 29,300, which is clearly a small number and an incorrect one, where is the error in my calculation?
Of course i should have added 1407 to the final answer, but that still doesn't explain the huge error.
I think that you did your math right. I tried 1406/x = 4.8/100 and I get around the same answer.
maybe its the fact that people share the same rating? but still not very convincing.
seem we are a growing loyal community since a big % of this is online compared to other sites
Your math is correct. A simpler version would be 1407 / (1-.952).
There are some strange things about that ratings distribution plot. For example at my current blitz rating 1985, it says I am better than 90.5% of players. But when you hover over various points on the cumulative graph, it says that 1975 is 89% of players and 2000 is 90% of players. In that case I definitely can't be better than 90.5% of players!
I suspect that are some anomalies in the ways they are doing the calcs. Given the size of discrepancy you founf they're quite likely including different sets of players in the different calculations somehow. e.g, Anyone who played / people who played any rated games / people who had an established rating.
It tells you how many players there are, no?
"54,730 Classical players this month."
From here
http://en.lichess.org/stat/rating/distribution/classicalBut it still doesn't explain the error in the calculations.
People who don't play competitively for a certain amount of time lose their ranking.