Makes sense. Even though the graph is not a watertight proof that the plateaus are distributed evenly, it is a good indication therefor.

_________________
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.

You have to look at changes in the declination of the graph !
For example, the number of 6k is about the same as the number of 5k. There seems to be some kind of barrier.

By the way: The static view on the number of players by rank does not say anything about how long someone is x kyu or y dan.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

It is not the same thing, but it certainly provides very relevant information. When you take an aerial snapshot of a highway, the places with the highest densities of cars are where the traffic jams are.

This may be.
If there are traffic jams, they will move over time.
And every car using the entire road will need the same time.

And - compared to the rank graph - you must not forget that there are a lot of cars not moving any more.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

If there are really too many non-moving cars (players with definitely stabilized ranks) this would also explain the lack of bumps around 12k, 5k and 1d.

Therefore, whether the static view of graph says something about the barriers depends on the ratio of stabilized ranks at each rank and the ratio of newcomers. Very difficult to tell. I agree it does not prove anything but it gives at least a rough indication.

_________________
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.

What is the difference between a "player with a definitely stabilized rank" and someone who has hit a roadblock?

If you have some programming facility, it would be an educational exercise to hack up a little simulation of a Go-playing population, including these roadblocks (e.g., automatically reduce the rate of improvement while a player is 5k). Run it for a few generations and take a snapshot of the rank distribution. I would be surprised if you could design a system that both had those roadblocks and didn't display bumps at those points on the rank distribution graph. I've been wrong before, though!

Perhaps the original poster hasn't hit a roadblock, 12k is just his definitely stabilized rank...

No, I am sure he will improve sooner or later if he keeps trying, this is just a roadblock.

But if he stops trying or even stops playing, then his kgs account will of course become a "stopped car".

If we assume that a static graph can say something about the roadblocks, then the distribution of the passive (rarely used and not improving) accounts will distort the graph in that sense because this distribution will be different than the one of actively improving players. If the distribution is the same, then the initial assumption that the static graph can say something about the roadblocks would be questionable.
Roadblocks at 12k, 5k, 1d, etc are defined only for those actively improving players (even if the improvement is slow).



By stabilizied rank, I mean the rank of players who rarely use their account and neither expect nor are concerned with improving. As said above, roadblocks are defined only for active players.
I have no idea about the ratio of passive (better say non-active) players on kgs, but I would guess their rank distribution differs from the general rank distribution or from the one of active players.

_________________
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.

Here are some results of an analysis of the EGF database. This database includes all players in all tournaments in Europe since 1996.

Shown is the mean value of the time in month between the first appearance in the list as "rank" and the first appearance as "rank + 1" (for example, 8k >>> 7k, 2d >>> 3d) for various periods of time.

Be aware that the longer the period is, the more "long-term-developers" are included. So it is natural that the general level of the values shown will increase.

But what is stable anyway are some peaks at very special ranks, as at 11k, 8k, and 5k.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

Here are some other results, based on accumulated medium values over different periods of time, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8 years. Highlighted are "4 years".

As before, level of the graphs rises with the amount of evaluated years, due to the "long-term-developers".

What may be more interesting than the still visible peaks are the three different ranges of development "speed".

Speed seems to be constant until approximately 12k, developments becomes a bit more difficult until approximately 3k, thereafter you have to invest much more time than before to get stronger.

This corresponds with the winning probability of "rank" in an even game against "rank + 1".

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

So, it seems that these common roadblocks really exist. Then the question is whether the reason why people get stuck at these specific levels are also common. If yes, what are they for each of these roadblocks? I guess this would be a valuable piece of information not only for anybody interested in doing some go study for improvement, but also for teachers.

_________________
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.

I have a suspicion: The roadblocks are there because the next rank is somehow "important".
- 11k is "not quite 10k".
- 5k seems to be a very common rank, you could say when you're better than 5k, you're above average.
- 1k is "not quite 1d".

I think that alone can be a reason why someone has a block at these ranks, because one tends to think "I'm nearly there, just a little bit", and that makes the rest harder. Compare it with endurance sports: At least for me, the last part where I can already see the finish line always seems to be the hardest

As far as I can see the OP didn't mean EGF ranks, and KGS ranks are not equal to EGF ranks, so the exact values seem to be arbitrary. Apart from that we see some nice bumps in the nice graphs, but are they statistically relevant at all? To me it rather seems to be an illusion.

You can find "statistically significant" or not using a chi squared test.

Here's on online version.

It's been years since I really understood how it works, but it's pretty easy to use on the front end. Give it your actual data (say, number of people at X rank), expected data (say, a bell curve fit of the data maybe?) and it'll tell you whether the difference is significant (if the p value is less than .05, I think).

_________________
1k KGS

Anyone else notice that this is still the OP's only post?

Also, that was the last time he visited the forums. I'm not sure any of our advice was that great anyway, but if it was, he probably didn't see it

@judicata, dfan: I did read all the posts. I have been moving, and was unable to post for a while.

So it looks like the general consensus is that experiencing rank plateaus is perfectly normal. I have still been studying, but haven't been able to get in many KGS games. Now that I am settled, I think I will be able to fit in more serious games.

Hopefully, with enough study, I will be able to break this 11-12kyu rut that I seem to be stuck in. *crosses fingers*

As normal as breathing. And it will probably last until the moment where you say "who cares about rank, let's try strange mvoes and enjoy playing". Then you start improving again, until the next plateau

_________________
If you say no, Elwood and I will come here for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day of the week.

Great! I forgot that you don't have to log in to read posts.

To be clear, my comment was not meant to disparage you at all. I just find it amusing when a forum goes crazy on a thread, and the OP just has a single post. I hope you stick with it and ask more questions.