New Ranks vs Old Ranks, Who Got What

Since both rating formula and ratings themselves changed, it’s interesting to see how ranks changed. I polled a bunch of active players. So linear.

image

Roughly like this, from linear fit

34k->23.8k
33k->22.9k
32k->22.1k
31k->21.2k
30k->20.9k
29k->19.8k
28k->18.9k
27k->18.2k
26k->17.5k
25k->16.7k
24k->15.9k
23k->15.3k
22k->14.4k
21k->13.8k
20k->13.1k
19k->12.3k
18k->11.7k
17k->10.7k
16k->10.1k
14k->8.6k
13k->7.8k
12k->7.0k
11k->6.3k
10k->5.6k
9k->4.7k
8k->4.0k
7k->3.2k
6k->2.5k
5k->1.7k
4k->1.0k
3k->0.2k
2k->1.5d
1k->2.3d
1d->3.0d
2d->3.9d

new_rank = 0.75459341 * old_rank + 9.00910366

So at 30k we get 9 stone boost to 21k. And at 7d we get no change at all. And at stronger 9d ranks it means their ranks get a little more difficult.

The ranks get a little bunched up, so with the same strength difference you’d give less handicap stones with the new system.

19 Likes

Thanks, @S_Alexander,

No idea whether it’s worth something, but I just had to take your numbers and make this graph to visualize how much the old ranks gained:

7 Likes

There have been several people that called for ranks below 25 kyu to be reinstated and differentiated. I guess with the rank system adjustment, they effectively got their wish, since old ranks as low as 34 kyu are now in the measured range of the current system.

4 Likes

Here is another visualization roughly depicting (within +/- 1 rank) the above data

A few observations…

  1. Old ranks from roughly 26 to 35 kyu have effectively been reinstated, but given a big boost to now be viewed as at least 25 kyu
  2. The new TPK (20+ kyu) ranks were completely off the old scale
  3. The adjustment slope of ~0.75 reduces the amount of handicap stones used. Two players that formerly played with 4 stones would now only use 3.
10 Likes

Yes, it appears farming weak players with handicap for rating points is gonna be even easier now.

Especially when there’s no losing when winning annoyance anymore.

1 Like

Nice diagram!

1 Like

Does anyone have a NEW version of this table?

5 Likes
525: 30k
548.2: 29k
572.4: 28k
597.7: 27k
624.1: 26k
651.6: 25k
680.4: 24k
710.4: 23k
741.8: 22k
774.5: 21k
808.7: 20k
844.4: 19k
881.7: 18k
920.6: 17k
961.2: 16k
1003.6: 15k
1047.9: 14k
1094.2: 13k
1142.5: 12k
1192.9: 11k
1245.6: 10k
1300.6: 9k
1358: 8k
1417.9: 7k
1480.5: 6k
1545.9: 5k
1614.1: 4k
1685.4: 3k
1759.8: 2k
1837.4: 1k
1918.5: 1d
2003.2: 2d
2091.7: 3d
2184: 4d
2280.4: 5d
2381.1: 6d
2486.2: 7d
2595.9: 8d
2710.5: 9d
2830.1: 10d

EDIT: oops; missed 1d. Internet cookie for guessing the logic that caused my program to do that. :smiley:
EDIT: fixed.

6 Likes

There seems to be a problem with your formula.

If old_rank = 30,
new_rank = 0.75459341 * 30 + 9.00910366 = 31.6 ≠ 21

Ranks in formulas start at 0 denoting 30k. Rank 0 means 30k, rank 20 means 10k, 29 means 1k, 30 means 1d. So you need to plug in zero there.

Perhaps rank zero at 30k symbolizes exactly how much skill you need to be 30k, zero.

So according to this

some players have negative skill.

yes… this sounds accurate… there are some who not only lack experience, but also intuition… their moves are essentially random at this stage

1 Like

Wouldn’t negative skill be moves that are worse than random?

(I can’t think of any other definition of “negative skill”, in fact…)

4 Likes

Well in fact I was going to say exactly this but somehow I felt it sounded rude :stuck_out_tongue: so I limited myself to calling it merely random haha

3 Likes

Personally I love the new ranking system. Got a massive ego boost when I signed back on after a year away from Go and I gained 3 ranks! :smile:
Now I’ve just got to make sure it doesn’t drop!

1 Like

I made a spreadsheet table of the ranks. Rounded rating and decimals.

2 Likes