For me anything from a few days to about 6 months. There would be outliers beyond that. I tend to only play “fast correspondence” tournaments. But even my “through the ages” games only lasted about 6 months.
The big picture is the same: a peak at 3 days.
I’m quite suprised by this result. It seems like there’s a lot of fast correspondence players which are able to complete a correspondence game in three days!
I thought about the bump in your chart and I believe it’s due to the clusters you applied to data in order to make them visible like a histogram.
Each bar has a different time span. So games that ended within, say, “1 week to 1 month” are more than games that ended within “1 day to 1 week”.
My chart instead shows that games that ended after exactly 30 days are less than games that ended after exactly 7 days.
Technically they are both correct, but I wonder which is more meaningful. I feel like yours is a little misleading, since at first it brought me to think that more games end after a month rather then a week, which is false.
Yeah, I of course meant redo it with logarithmic bins. As I said, it makes sense to group together 400 and 410 while keeping 1 and 10 separate.
If you mean games that ended exactly on the 7th day vs games ended on exactly 30th day, I don’t think the question is good. When we say, oh, the game lasted an hour, we might mean actually give or take 10 minutes. Game took a week, it could be maybe 6-8 days actually. If we say a year, we could generously give or take even couple months. We think in relative values.
And the area is preserved, I think. So as you said, it’s easy to compare ranges, especially with helpful red lines.
To be honest, haven’t thought about it in a while.