We started discussing this in my study journal, but I thought it deserved it's own thread. The idea is just that we form a group of those who want some regular opponents and play some games. So far we've agreed that the games will have handicaps based on previous performance against that person, but everything else is still up in the air. Lets get the details sorted so we can start playing. (Though me and skydyr already did)

Some things that need deciding:

1) How many wins/losses in a row before the handicap changes? (Answer the poll)

2) What are the different steps of the handicaps system? It's been sugested that even game = alternating colours with no komi. This sounds fine to me, but would that mean there's no intermediate step between even game and 2 stone handicap?

3) Who wants to play? Reply to this thread if you're interested.

Current members:

Splatted
Skydyr - evening EST (GMT -4/5)
Boidhre
Vpopovic (Vladimir)
Unusedname
rhubarb
Loganmhb - evenings EST (GMT -4/5)
Amelia (Soji)
Shinkenjoe
moyoaji - afternoon EST (GMT -4/5)

Finals ate my time last week, but I am definitely interested in this.

Regarding 2) -- if we want to avoid komi (which is appealing to me for whatever reason) we could do as the pros did and use sen-ai-sen as an intermediate between 2-stone and even games. I don't know how that would affect the 2-game versus 3-game handicap "tipping point," which seem like the two likeliest options to me.

Edit: I voted for 3 games before switching, but I can also see the logic of a 2-win system (since who knows how often we'll actually be playing.) As an alternative, we could do a hybrid system--3 in a row or 4 out of 5, for example.

Further edit: If sen-ai-sen (taking Black in two out of three games) is TOO small (after all, we are not Japanese pros) one player could simply take Black all the time as an intermediate step between even and two-stone games.

Traditionally, by my understanding, with moving between 2 and more stone handicaps, there was an alternation of the handicap number similar to sen-ai-sen, so black might take two stones on even games and three stones on odd games, for example, or 2 of one of them and 1 of the other.

EDIT:
Depending on how fine a grading you want, you could do something like BW (even), BWB, BB, B2B, B2, 2B2, 2, 232, etc.

I think this is a bit too fine grained, but I'd be fine with half steps, like BW, BB, 2B, 22, 23, 33.

It may also be good to change the speed at which the handicap changes based on how many games you've played. Your first 5, maybe it changes every game or 2 games or so, and once it's more stable, every 3 or more?

Honestly, since we're keeping track of records individually and not according to set ranks that apply across the board, there's no reason that each pair has to use the same settings, so long as they are decided in advance.

Perhaps we should request a forum for activity related to this group, to keep all the postings clustered together? I expect lots of game records to be posted and discussed, and I don't know what forum/category would be best for them right now. I posted my game with Splatted in the study group forum, but I'm not even sure that's the right place... maybe game analysis would be better?

I'd like to join, please.

I think changes with 3 games is good if you have a pair of people playing very regularly. With the frequency I'd guess that we'll be playing at I think we would see very few changes with this number so perhaps 2 is best. It will introduce a lot of "noise" with handicaps changing where they probably shouldn't but it should make the games more fun if there's a constant battle to correct the handicap or force it more away from where it's supposed to be between different pairs of players.

I think the main criterion should be how often you can play against a specific player. The parameters would be here general frequency of games, size of the group, and how are opponents selected. For situations when you can play a specific opponent often, 3 wins for each handi change seems ok. Otherwise, do 2 wins.

There are other parameters of lesser importance, for example: the average rank (the lower the rank, the faster the progress, and thus the more frequent handi changes), speed of games (the faster the game, the more frequent handi change... maybe, or the other way, whatever.) And so on.

So, it is really hard to say.

I would try changing handi every 2 wins and see how it goes. If things get too crazy, you can adjust. But I find it interesting to play with possibly incorrect handicap up or down, can be very educational even if game results are easier to predict. So try 2 wins for starter... This would be my advice.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

I'm also a fan of this--I like the no handicap challenges you end up with on the OGS ladder and some of the tournaments, and proposed that reduced handicaps be the default of a server (just like they often were at the clubs I played at, and in AGA tournaments). But most people disliked that.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

I've added Rhubarb and Loganmhb. I'm assuming that anyone who joins in the discussion but doesn't ask to be added is just interested in the discussion.



I'd be fine with this or whole steps.



I think it makes more sense to change it based on how often you play, but really I'd rather just have a system and stick to it.



I thought that at first but I don't really want to have to keep track of different handicap systems with different opponents. If anyone particularly wants to play differently I won't stand in their way, but it seems easiest to have a default system.



I tried my best but I couldn't form an opinion on this.



You basically just read my mind and then re-phrased it more eloquently.

I would like to join. My latest random encounters on KGS haven't been very satisfying.

Great, I've added you Amelia. Has anyone actually had any games yet? I've not been seeing anyone online except for Boidhre who's sometimes there when I'm logging off.

I've been pretty crap and not gotten any online games in in about two weeks.

It might be a good idea to post people's timezones or at least a vague idea of when they might be on to play. I'm in EST (GMT -4 or -5 depending on the season) and am most frequently on during the evening, though I can be pretty flaky then too.

I will be there this evening from 20:00 (GMT +1)
Edit: and since I never mentioned this, KGS account is Soji.

I also tend to be on evenings EST (GMT-5) -- although I go to bed fairly early since I have to get up quite early to work on the farm.

If anyone's interested, I'd be up to arrange/schedule some games ahead of time, so we don't have to rely on being on KGS at the same time. As it stands I'm free tomorrow after 2 or so EST, and all day Monday.

Since I so rarely seem to run into anyone on KGS, do any of you play on DGS or OGS? With a turn based server, timing becomes a lot less of an issue.

Hey skydyr and everyone

I've made an OGS account. IGN - Unusedname

So anyone who wants to send me a challenge is free to cause i have no idea how this thing works o_o

Could I make a suggestion here?

Instead of asking a group of people most of whom can be assumed to lack the background in mathematics to properly answer the question (except as a pure guess) how about changing the poll question into something that we can assume that they do understand and then the math folks among us can translate that into the proper number of games won/lost.

In other words, as "what is the acceptable level of error changing rank assignments?". Is it OK to be wrong one time in four? (changed rank but shouldn't have). One time in eight? Or am I going in the wrong direction? Would anybody be happy with changing the rank as soon as more likely than not justified? (in other words, wrong half the time).

Once that is decided upon, those of us competent in statistics can easily compute the number of wins necessary for that degree of certainty.

For those who don't understand my point, consider flipping an honest coin X times. The coin is assumed honest so no change of rank is correct (and a rank change wrong). Say that X is three. Do you think three heads in a row (promote) or three tails in a row demote)would be particularly unlikely outcomes? (for example, I'm seeing some suggest two in a row and that's as likely as not to be wrong --- and even the non-math folks should easily be able to see why as the pair of outcomes resulting in a rank change (HH and TT) and the pair that do not (HT and TH) have the same likelihood.

I am not too worried if the handicap gets out of whack a bit. It'll make for a challenging set of games and keep things dynamic.

Just to mention a bit different setup, used in our city league, works well there:

Initially everybody who joins gets a questimate of points based on current rank somewhere, say 1d= 70, a rank up or down is +-5.

For every win, you get +1 point, for every loss you lose -1 point. To get correct handi, you count the difference in points, divide by 5.

In effect, if two players play against each other, initially at even, and one keeps winning: 70/70 = even -> 71/69 = even -> 72/68 = 1 handi etc.

So the effect is quite like 2 wins -> change in handicap, but I think it is nicer and easier for those situations where people play multiple opponents, each of them quite seldom. YMMV.