OGS rank histogram (outdated)

Yes, I try to play 13x13 and know all too well that no one wants to play it. I bet that these 14% of players play 13x13 just because it exists as official ranked board size (and it has its own correspondence ladder). My point is that very small percent of people actually want 13x13, it’s more or less “hey, it exists, why not play it?” For example, if ogs didn’t have 19x19 as ranked board, people would want it implemented, if ogs didn’t have 9x9, people would want it. If ogs didn’t have ranked 13x13 (and it was just an irregular board size), no one would care in particular.

Edit: I wonder what numbers will we get if we exclude all ladder and automatic tournament games.

2 Likes

OGS by time controls

pic

Most popular time controls:

System Description Percent
1 byoyomi 5m+5x30s ~10%
2 byoyomi 10m+5x30s ~7%
3 fischer 2m+30s/move up to 5m ~7%
4 byoyomi 20m+5x30s ~6%
5 fischer 30s+10s/move up to 60s ~4%
6 fischer 3d+1d/move up to 1w ~4%
7 byoyomi 10m+4x30s ~2%
8 byoyomi 15m+5x30s ~2%
9 simple 60s/move ~1%
10 byoyomi 5m+5x10s ~1%
8 Likes

And now filter by rank. :slight_smile:

2 Likes

You think it matters?

1 Like

I’d like to see a rank histogram of correspondence players vs. live players.

I think there’s a systematic shift (corr < live).

4 Likes

Apologies, because there’s an undocumented feature that exists for no reason whatsoever all ladder games were skipped in my code. Now that I included them, number of corr games is a bit higher:

pic

That bumps up 3d+1d up to 3d in time controls rating:

System Description Percent
1 byoyomi 5m+5x30s ~9%
2 byoyomi 10m+5x30s ~7%
3 fischer 2m+30s/move up to 5m ~6%
4 byoyomi 20m+5x30s ~6%
5 fischer 30s+10s/move up to 60s ~4%
6 fischer 3d+1d/move up to 1w ~3%
7 fischer 3d+1d/move up to 3d ~3%
8 byoyomi 10m+4x30s ~2%
9 byoyomi 15m+5x30s ~1%
10 simple 60s/move ~1%

Now with a quick hack from size by rank chart we can get live/corr vs rank:

Notice that since I count players here, not games percent of correspondence is higher. Probably it means that corr fans play fewer games each, while live players pump out a lot of games.

I also wonder whether the way I download games affect this in any way. I go through game ids with a certain big step. And corr players often start games in a tournament simultaneously so games are created in batches. And my script can step over whole tournaments. Should be fine in the end, of course, but I keep my suspicions.

7 Likes

Gee I wonder why there are so many 13k’s :wink:

3 Likes

Interestingly, despite your common insistance that almost all new players will be closer to 25 kyu than 13 kyu, looking at that graph, it seems the 9 ranks above 13 kyu are all much more populated than the 9 ranks below 13 kyu

(note that the y-axis represents number of players, so it isn’t simply a matter of “stronger players play more games”)

The high number of players at specifically 13 kyu likely represents the players who have played 0-1 ranked games + the number of actual 13 kyu players

1 Like

@GreenAsJade, I think you’re a bit joking here. But why there are so many 13k indeed? Because stable 13ks won’t give you this spike. This spike is caused by all unstable 13ks, in other words new players. Even one ranked game will throw you off starting 13k rating. So these people never played ranked.

@BHydden, we can check that! We can ask ogs what was rating of each player after, say, 20 or 30 games and we could build a histogram of that.

2 Likes

It makes sense: I play almost only correspondence. I can play many games at a time, but they usually take months to end. So eventually I’m pretty sure I play fewer games than a live player that plays one game at a time but regularly.

I really like your charts and would like to make my own. Could you explain how do you retrieve data?

1 Like

What are the units on your pie charts, especially the first one? I assume it is the number of games played.

If you could get the “time spent thinking” on every game and compare that, it might make for a better statistic. What I mean is the time that I am looking at the game in my browser window, regardless of who’s clock is running.

Another refinement for your rank chart: as mentioned before, the 13k spike is due to accounts without (m)any rated games. You might want to filter the data by some threshold of rank uncertainty, and then also distribute every data point among the rank “baskets” according to their probability (e.g. a 2k ±1 might be 3k or even 1k).

2 Likes

I think filtering by uncertainty would be a great move.

In fact, it’d be interesting to see a histogram for ranks over uncertainty 2.5 and ranks under 2.5 (I chose that number because that’s the biggest sort of number I’ve seen for people who are playing regularly and have stabilised, but it could be any number in that sort of range)

GaJ

1 Like

@Animiral, @GreenAsJade, “time spent thinking” wouldn’t work with correspondence. And I’m not sure what else we’ll get from that. 13k spike is basically because of people with 0 ranked games (even 1 game is enough to throw off you from 13k). Distributing ranks to bins according to probability that they have one rank of another sounds way too complicated to be honest. Simple filtering is better, but I don’t think in these particular graphs it matters much. For example, for overall rank histogram I separated them, in post №1. In terms of filtering I think it’s best to use rating points, after all Glicko deals with rating and ranks are there just for convenience. 100 sounds about right, maybe a bit higher, like 125.

Looks like it’s almost impossible to get deviation lower than 60. Point on the far right is GnuGo with deviation of 59 and 173831 played games. And you can see a high point of 355 deviation which is higher than starting 350, kinda weird how that would work.

3 Likes

Hmm - I’m not sure what Animiral was imagining, and I agree that thinking time is not really measurable especially for correspondence.

But what I had in mind was “a histogram of the distribution of ranks for all players who’s rank uncertainty is less than 2.5”.

IE only include in the histogram those players who have a rank that we are moderately sure about.

And then I thought that the opposite would also be interesting (in fact, even more interesting). I would like to see a histogram of rank distribution counting only those players who’s rank uncertaintly is > 2.5. This is “the rank distribution of players who are quite new”.

GaJ

1 Like

(Corr is time per move > 60 minutes)

Log scale:

Corr only:

3 Likes

At last one. Mine.

1 Like

Could you please provide some additional information how you got data for your chart? I’d be interested to have a look too

1 Like

You can get the data via the API. See:

https://ogs.docs.apiary.io
https://online-go.com/api

2 Likes

Stats from google searches.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=baduk,weiqi

2 Likes

So everyone knows what it is now? :slight_smile:

1 Like