Feature Request: Player Type Profiling

Imagine you’re in the mood for a tense game with lots of tricky reading problems; but you don’t know anyone like that.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you could just scroll through a list of players that match that description?

There could be an optional panel at the end of every game to categorize an opponent’s play-style.

And if enough people list someone as say: “good fighter” or “strong defense” a tag will be added to that user’s’ profile to indicate so. The tags aren’t permanent and thus change as the player does.

I feel It’s another great way to connect with others. Plus, it’s always cool seeing your strengths acknowledged!

The idea is still pretty rough, I’d like to see what other improvements we can come up with!

1 Like

Would that change a lot, especially below dan level, though? For example, I just got a book in the mail about using thickness, so I’ve been experimenting a lot with that in my games. I don’t really think I have a style. My style, if you could call it that, is whatever I’m trying to work on at the moment.

Good point. A lot of players (me included) won’t have a consistent style for quite some time, but I can imagine a player who’s received one or two tags in the same area wondering to themselves: " was I really like that?" and then look back on his/her recent games. Seeing how others could perceive them like that.

Perhaps they go a step further, and realize they do worse in games against territorial opponents, or they survive longer in games with aggressive types . In this case they figure they’re good with influence.

So yes, you are right. The prospect of adopting a style off a few tags don’t seem likely ( or recommended) but as a way for one to structure their learning around.

A similar feature request was posted here:

Recommend you consider voting for it or adding a new feature request.


Certainly comments prove more versatile than tags.

I still stand for the idea of tags though, the power to be recognised at a glance; it gets me pumped!

I’ll vote for the request, I was not aware of a site like that, thank you!

1 Like

It just occured to me another way to enrich these tags.

Perhaps a player who consistently receives a “good pressure” rating from every three or so opponents could have that be shown in some way.

Their tag could be updated for instance. So a “good pressure” tag can turn into a “strong pressure” one with enough ratings.

I think the progression could go something like this, with “Pressure” being an example category.

  1. Good Pressure

  2. Strong Pressure

  3. Master Pressure

Of course only those who’ve played many games and truly devoted themselves to a style can reach a master rating.

As a side note I think the “rating power” of an opponent should decided by their rank, since to 30 kyu’s everything’s obviously going to seem strong to them. (rich coming from a fellow kyu as well)

Input thus far has been much appreciated!

well, I always experience quite a bit pressure while playing with someone few stones then me… so I think pressure it’s not something native to the player, it’s more or less determined by the rank difference.

And since players might adopt different playing style depending on the rank difference+subjectivity of rating + as samraku said, they might experiment is a lot of different styles there would be too much noise in the tag for it to be useful.


Thank you spatula for your feedback!

People play according to the situation, that is true, but we all have our leanings. Even orthodox players could be considered to have preference! they play the most practical move, straight and to the point.

Try to think of tags not as a classification of someone, but as a highlight of their strengths!

I’m not really interested in this as a feature, it sounds a bit like it could be used either to “get back” at a player or be some sort of status symbol. Since all the games are public, I think looking over the last few games would give someone a pretty clear impression of what kind of player they are.


Thank you @lukaluke for your critique!

A link was posted here by @Tom_Newman about the discussed feature of making notes on player’s profiles.

one of the concerns a commenter raised was that it could be used maliciously, to which the OP reassured they would be private and viewable to the creator alone.

While this doesn’t directly relate to the topic at hand I feel it demonstrates that there are plenty of ways to regulate features of this nature.

these are categories of strength, I’m pretty sure the best insult a player could muster is not tagging at all! (or calling their moves simple :joy:)

yes, but is it so wrong to desire recognition? we have trophies for that of course, but this gives flavour to the talent.[quote=“lukaluke, post:9, topic:5532”]
I think looking over the last few games would give someone a pretty clear impression of what kind of player they are.

yes, looking at a persons games speaks volumes of their style, much more than a few tags could. It’s akin to sitting down and getting to know someone versus looking through their social media,

but as I mentioned in the first post, the appeal of the tags come through their brevity and clarity.

sometimes you just want a match! what follows is contingent upon how both players follow-up.

This is not a comic book.

Quantitative measures, yes. As many as we can work out.

Qualitative measures… Why? That’s ridiculous. Like online dating profiles.

1 Like

:grin: yes! find Shusaku’s true match for you on OGS today!

As for the comic book and quantitative stuff your saying, I’m not quite sure what you mean. Can you elaborate @Professor_X?

In response to the skepticism tagging has received, I’ve put forth a general case for the two common arguments I’ve been seeing.

1. What’s The Point?

Go, like most strategy games, comes with a great deal of depth in play. Unlike most strategy games however, a player’s strength is not determined solely on the strategy they use, ironically.

To give an example, Chess is a game in which player style is not the main concern. More emphasis is placed on the formation and livelihood of one’s materials rather than seeking an interesting move. For it is a battlefield, and one pawns overplay could lead to defeat.

“Chess is 99% tactics.” – Richard Teichmann, (1868-1925),

In Go, reading is what leads the play. Understanding basic joseki and tesuji helps as well, but it all branches out from one’s ability to asses a situation. How we all read a board state varies widely, and Go is so enriched, that there rarely ever is “The right way”.

Here is a quote I found by Hikaru no Go creator, Yumi Hotta.

All you are is the go you play.

  • Hotta Yumi

While not a high-dan player, her words hold truth.

Daring, artistic, flexible, sharp, thick… These are some of the many ways we can describe a game of Go,

So when we see a strong player, and their profile displays all their trophies. Does that really give context to the viewer?

Strength comes in many forms, so let it be shown!

2. Style Is Situational

2a) Beginners and Practicing Concepts

During both times, a player will have no consistent style, and for good reason. It is in these times Tags still serve a purpose, for instance, finding out if:

1) Your practice is paying off (being tagged as such), and

2) How you stack against certain match-ups ( whole-board vs. local player)

2b) Handicap Games

A lot of things change handicap games, alongside style as well. What is a traditional opening no longer applies, a good move is no longer sufficient, spreading stones thinly becomes a viable option.

So to say tags will be irrelevant in that situation comes as no surprise.

Thank you all for posting and adding to the discussion, I would really appreciate it if you could share this thread, or like some of the posts by members here!

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.