When a person is say 24k and is playing a person that is say 25k, of course, that could be anywhere from 25k to as in my case, 69,k and up. Why doesn’t the system give a handicap to the lessor player a proper number of stones, as is the case when that same player of 25k and up plays a 16k player or lower they alwasy gets stones – is there a reason ? for this any comments ?
Its because of a comparative skill difference.
The difference, for example, is that there is a significant difference between 5kyu, and 10kyu, which would be five stones or thereabouts.
But, factually speaking, anything beyond 30kyu… and even for many people, 30kyu, doesn’t really exist. It only exists here as an anomaly of the ranking system, and that’s why it goes so far down. The reason I mention upto 30kyu, is because functionally spoekaing there is almost no difference between players between 20 and 30 kyu. The gap may feel significant to you, and I’m not saying your experience isn’t valid, but functionally the skills needed to progress are so limited that one could reasonably jump from 30 kyu to 20 kyu in a week or less.
And I’m not saying that to shame anyone, but it’s functionally true in terms of raw skills and their application to the game.
There would also be no functional value in giving people at that rank a handicap stone. Perhaps a reverse komi? But even that I’m dubious of because of the usually massive score differences. Giving anyone a stone, or roughly a ten-point lead, is insignificant in games that can have scores that vary between 20 and a hundred points super easily on a 19x19 board.
All of that to say…it would be functionally redundant.
1 Like
I think dokbohm would win more games against 25k rated 25 kyus if he got 44 handicap stones.
5 Likes
Where does that “69k” thing come from?
My , not very common, opinion is that handicap stones are not very good at giving even matches.
I’ve played a few games with good handicap against players who where 6+ stones stronger than me and I felt like crap, because the ability, the effectiveness, the intuition was so far away. Even in close fights, with all my handi stones around, they were still able to beat whatever out of me.
One stone doesn’t exist.
Two or three stones may have sense with two quite experienced players which had a few matches and noticed that the balance was a little bit off.
The rest is pointless.
What I reckon is that between new players the probability of making mistakes and blunders is so high, that handi stones are negligible.
I’m SDK now and still I make a lot of silly mistakes. No number of stones can help with that.
Don’t rely on handicap to have a satisfying and balanced game. It doesn’t come from there.
Play a lot (it seems to me that you already do that).
Enjoy wins. Don’t get mad at losses. In the big numbers you’ll find a bunch of satisfying games.
2 Likes
thanks for the replies most were helpful for the discussion– and yes, I’m over 69k if you look at my stats as of today – but they just show 25k when i play someone on the grid of play table — the idea i see now—- is that say a 5k and 10 k player is greater in diiffenece– than say a 24k and and in my case 69k player that seems a little confusing to me – but i see you have facts to back that up so i will accept it – i guess us rug rats down at the bottom are basically lumped together so will have have to just accept that reality i guess– thx for the input all even the despairing remarks from some
Another point I like to add— why is it I see very little input in the forums from beginners? It should be a higher percentage of questions asked and input given by those of lesser knowledge of the game than from experts i would think but mainly that is the reverse – are new players and higher k players just intimidated to write anything for fear of reprisals or made unwelcome??? or as i found when i pose this questions while play – they just don’t know about the forums and how they work—- why is that ???
The system assigns a 24k rank to a novice player. It would make no sense for that player to give many stones to a 69k.
It’s less about “rug rats being lumped together” and more about relative skill and knowladge. consider if you will children who often have different abilities inside and outside of school, still having to attend the same calsses, because they still dont know how to write or spell in their respective languge, reguardless of any ability, or lack there of, to learn well.
Its the same with go, the fundamental rules, and how to play the game are the base line entry level of the game itself, and so, when someone is new, or simply has yet to grasp these things, they will fall into the lower/lowest ranks of the game. There is simply a Negligable difference between a 20k and a 25k player. The only real difference would be a slightly firmer grasp on a conceptual level of what the game of Go is “about”.
As for your other comment @dokbohm , there are often newer players that come and make comments in here. But by and large most people either dont know about the forums, or simply arent interested in getting involved with them. I remember being fairly new to the community on OGS, and commenting and making posts asking for reviews, and as annoying as I know I am, the community here on OGS is one of the most welcoming and open ones that ive been a part of across many different communities. Yes, I dissagree often, but i dont for one moment think that I am disrepsected.
The difference you have in this experience is how you approach the community by and large. If you yourself are having a bad time, its generally because you’ve earned that by your own time in this community and how you yourself have treated the community. There are… of course, some people that are negative, and you would be right in your assumption that every community has “bad actors”… I’m not denying that for a moment, and you have indeed run into them. But, from my other interactions with you, and the interactions ive seen you be in… largely, your experience in the forums is singular in your abilitity to seemingly annoy as many people as possible with seemingly little effort on your part.
That said, even though i have been one of those people being annoyed by you, ive also, and will continue to treat any legitimate question you have with the seriousness it deserves. So long as you are resceptive to honest, and factual answers.
1 Like
i guess from the above post proves my point about forums and newbies etc thanks for the honest if not stinging post –
A 5 kyu and a 10 kyu differ by 313 Glicko rating. From 100 games the 10 kyu will win approx. 14 on average.
A 20 kyu and a 30 kyu differ by 296 Glicko rating. From 100 games the 30 kyu will win approx. 15 on average.
The frustration a 10 kyu feels when constantly losing against a 5 kyu is probably very similar to the frustration a 30 kyu feels when constantly losing against a 20 kyu.
By the way: A 69 kyu can expect to win between 3 to 4 games out of 100 games against a 25 kyu.
I’m firmly convinced that ignoring (or should I say disrespecting) differences in strength below 24 kyu is super beginner-unfriendly or even beginner-hostile. It is also super frustrating for me personally as a supporter of this site.
I also believe this to be a major blocker for growth of OGS.
(For conversion from rank to rating I used the formula from here - which I believe is correct. For the expected outcome I’m using Elo (which is good enough for this purpose I believe).)
8 Likes
I don’t believe I was being disrespectful in any way. But how I see what I wrote above, and how others may see that, are two different things. I apologise if what I said caused any offence to any lower-ranked person. Having been there myself and being frustrated, I know what it is like to feel talked down to.
I think there is certainly merit to what I have said. And I don’t think there is a linear progression that the numbers you have used imply. That said, it is the duty of all good Go players to be as welcoming as possible to new players, and I should have represented that better. For that i also apologise.
Note that I’m criticizing the algorithm OGS is using to pair beginners. And this is what I’m calling beginner-unfriendly or even beginner-hostile.
I’m just using math to demonstrate how frustrating it would be in the long run for people of different strengths to get paired against each other - based on your examples.
And much worse than your examples: Pairing a 69 kyu against a 25 kyu does not make any sense whatsoever.
Yet OGS’s algorithm seems to be happy to create such pairings.
How about giving what OGS is doing a name? How about calling it “the hockey stick of frustration”?
The rating graph above is from JoCatz and you will see this shape with almost every beginner starting to play Go on OGS.
4 Likes
If I can chime in here as a 24-21kyu player.
Where the difference between 20 and 25 might seem negligible to a strong player, (and it most certainly is). I’m not advocating for giving stones as handicap but I can say the down here we do see a difference between 20 and 25k (not to mention 69k). I played the OP and you can see from that game there was a difference in level. (I did make my share of blunders no doubt)
8 Likes
Hello @dokbohm. Newbs like us do quite periodically show up in the forum asking questions and we get a lot of support
If you look at this thread from when I started back in July @tonybe does a great job explaining basics to us. Some serious effort here from his part
The OGS forum is very active, yes generally by higher rated players but that because they have a certain degree of permanence here and engage regularly. I’m sure that our newbie questions come up every two months or so but that gets buried in the feed by the multitude of other conversations popping up and all going on at once
7 Likes
I think the issue is clear in this graph. At 20k there are perhaps 25.000 players at your level. All who may or may not engage on a regular basis. Down at say 30k there are likely only hundreds and who knows what percentage are daily players. There is a lack of volume that leads to the pairing of a 69k Vs a 24k it seems. There is no quick fix for that
4 Likes
Let’s have a look at a very similar graph: The rapid ratings on chess.com:
They have a huge number of players at the lowest possible rating (which is 100 - just like on OGS) and the largest number of players at a rating of 300 (which corresponds to 44 kyu on OGS).
Do they force every beginner through the hockey stick of frustration?
Of course not! These are their (potential) customers.
Do they disrespect the playing strength of people between a rating of 100 and 700 and create games that don’t make any sense?
Of course not!
Sure, people at that level in chess blunder left, right and center but they have fun doing it, because they can play against people of similar strength and do win about half of their games.
Of course OGS only has very few players below 25 kyu, because it is super frustrating to play Go at that level on OGS.
3 Likes
Given there’s so many players at 100, that graph seems to suggest to me that chess.com should’ve extended their ratings even lower and allow for negative ratings. Instead, they set a rating floor of 100.
OGS similarly set a floor of 25k. Doesn’t every Go server have a floor? Like, there’s a 18k floor on Pandanet and Fox too. Scratch Go servers, isn’t there a rating floor for every single game out there?
1 Like
Excellent point @FritzS. The thing is, with the volume of players on chessdot you’re pretty much guaranteed a quick match regardless of your level, In OGS at 69K we don’t have that luxury. The Hockey Stick of frustration (love the term btw) sucks, no doubt. but lets consider the alternative. all declared newbs are started at 69K? How long would it take to claw your way out of that basement? That could also be kind of frustrating. In my case starting and trying to keep myself above 25k was (and still is) a big motivator.
Below my “hockey stick”, I put in work, do tsumego, completed the free “learn to play go” course offered here, and on go magic, found a mentor (thanks @trohde ) You also wouldn’t want to frustrate that profile of player, by making them start with an abysmal rating and no chance for matches.
Another point with chess dot com rapid ratings, You can be rated 100 elo and be losing every single game, and you can be rated 170 and be winning 50% of them, and the skill difference between those two players can be huge in their relative sense. (granted the plethora of blunders at 100 makes it hard to lose 100% of your games).
In the end I think the main goal is to get quick matches with people of similar skill and we need volume for that so regardless of the ratings that 69K player is going to have to face off with a 30K rated player and lose, regardless of the ratings system we apply. In any case, you seem to have a better grasp on this than me so I’d love to hear what solutions to the ratings system you think would work, cus i’m not able to see one.
3 Likes
Looking at a few profiles, a 30k has a higher rating than about 5% players, and a 40k has a higher rating than about 1.2% of players. For comparison, a 1.5d has a lower rating than about 5% of players, and a 4.0d has a lower rating than about 1.2% of players.
It’s possible that dan players are more active than beginners, so I guess that OGS could use 30k ranks for matchmaking, but not below, or not much below.
3 Likes
I do have a strong opinion on this specific question as well: Introducing a rating floor is a bad idea!
Not only does it cause people weaker than that floor being paired against opponents that are stronger than them (which is frustrating), it is also pushing into this delicate cloud of ratings (that tries to find its equilibrium) and distorts it at the lower end - with multiple negative consequences.
I believe the main goal for any online game server is to create matches that are fun!
If you design an online server in a way that guarantees that beginners will go through a frustration period at the beginning and on top of that design it so that beginners that still stick around after having dropped to their appropriate rating level will still regularly be paired against players way stronger than them, it’s no wonder that you don’t have beginners playing on that server.
Designing the system in a beginner-unfriendly way and then justifying this design by the fact that you are not attracting many beginners doesn’t make a lot of sense, does it?
Why not below?
Almost all humans on this planet are significantly weaker in Go than 30 kyu. Why not allow them to find an equal opponent on OGS?
3 Likes