= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Perplexed comments on The Curve of Capability - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (264)
Actually, the argument could be turned around. A 5 kyu player can give a 9 kyu player a 4 stone handicap and still have a good chance of winning. A 9 dan, offering a 4 stone handicap to a 5 dan, will be crushed.
By this metric, the distance between levels becomes smaller at the higher levels of skill.
It is unclear whether odds of winning, log odds of winning, number of handicap stones required to equalize odds of winning, or number of komi points required to equalize odds of winning ought to be the metric of relative skill.
Probably not by very much. One of the main motivations behind the grading system is to allow people of different grades to easily calculate the handicap needed to produce a fair game - e.g. see here:
You may be right that the system is flawed - but I don't think it is hugely flawed.
The difference is between amateur and professional ratings. Amateur dan ratings, just like kyu ratings, are designed so that a difference of n ranks corresponds to suitability of a n-stone handicap, but pro dan ratings are more bunched together.
See Wikipedia:Go pro.