Why do you want to be _____d/____k?

[daal]

If you look at those bell curves showing rank distribution, you'll see that everybody and their brother is 5k and that there are far fewer 1ds. Being another sheep in the herd is not particularly glamorous.

[TIM82]

My personal feeling is that either:
a) people are under the impression that go is somehow 'more fun' when you are 1d (as opposed to 5k, for example), or
b) the game is somehow 'different' then, or
c) they chase after some imagined status within their local groups.

Well, I definitely agree to all the points above about being tired of mistakes, but also:

A stronger player once said, "around 1d, you tend to be able to make sense of a players moves - there are mistakes, but you see some kind of understandable plan behind each move." I personally feel that now around 1k-1d I'm significantly better at planning the whole board, and seeing effects of particular moves or sente/gote differences also further away on the board. At least when I'm concentrating and not playing fast. Similarly appreciating stronger players games.

Perhaps I just was lucky an learned something about the above at the right rank, but for me, Bantari's option B is at least somewhat true. But not A, go is still just as fun

[often]

If you look at those bell curves showing rank distribution, you'll see that everybody and their brother is 5k and that there are far fewer 1ds. Being another sheep in the herd is not particularly glamorous.

You'd think that, but i look back on my 3k-5k days fondly. I always had someone to play at the club and we would always argue the result afterwards. As i got stronger i played less people in my club and now I only play one guy consistently. I sorta miss the days when i could show up anywhere and play most people even.

Isn't your rank supposed to be a reflection of your playing ability?

Sort of, but not exactly. Your rank is more like an average of your strengths and weaknesses in go. Which means you could be a 5k in the opening, a 1d in life and death, and a 3k in attack and defense. If you end up playing and losing to people who are great in the opening you might think you are lower than you might be. And if you play a bunch of people and can beat them in life and death situations you might think you are higher than you might be. This is compounded by the problem that in clubs people are only exposed to one playing style if they play the same group.

Also, people define a "dan" differently. A lot of asian teachers i've come across define a 1d as having a decent grasp of all the fundamentals.

I think it's better to say that your rank is just an easy yardstick as to which you can compare yourself to others and has very little to do with playing ability.

[Boidhre]

If we wanted to be colorless dweebs, we would use straight up Elo points like chess players.

Chess players don't use kyu and dan but they do have fixations with surpassing certain ELO thresholds (i.e. every 100 points after 1800 seems to be considered serious improvement, below that most people can expect to hit 1500/1600 with some effort). There's also the A/B/C/D class player stuff. ELO numbers look colourless but humans apply plenty of colour to them.

[Bonobo]

Very nice question, IMHO.

When I began my fourth approach to Go, some three years ago, I had grand illusions about “reaching 1d in a year”, meanwhile I have found that, at my age (now 56) and with that little time I have for real study, I can be happy if I reach SDK in my lifetime.

So, while I still read Go literature (meanwhile I have more than I’ll be able to read through in this life), and while I still enjoy reading it, I have given up on improving. I mean, I love to learn new things, but I’m not any more in it for the competition, all that I’m interested in is having more fun playing, and, if possible, to learn more about myself and the world while doing so.

The only reason why I still want to get better is that I find myself teaching Go to lots of people, mostly kids but also adults, and I want to give them the best start possible, but here I have no ___ d/___k goal, I just want to understand more of Go to be able to convey the most fundamental, essential, core ideas of the game as fast as possible and as easily as possible.

For me, the game of Go has a lot to do with personal progress, and I want those people to get as much out of Go as they can, I want them to have as much fun as they can, I want them to stick with it and enjoy playing Go long after I’ve go-ne.

[Bonobo]

Sorry for quoting myself, but one thing seems important to me:

I wrote

[..] all that I’m interested in is having more fun playing, and, if possible, to learn more about myself and the world while doing so.

[..]

Actually, I believe that these things: having more fun and learning more about oneself and the world, are really profound improvements to focus upon, but more on a meta level. So, I guess I haven’t really given up on improving

[Ember]

This is a really good question and there were some very interesting (and fun! ) answers up to now.

On Bantari's ideas:

My personal feeling is that either:
a) people are under the impression that go is somehow 'more fun' when you are 1d (as opposed to 5k, for example), or
b) the game is somehow 'different' then, or
c) they chase after some imagined status within their local groups.

on a) Honestly, I do believe in this. Of course, I always had a lot of fun playing go (well, mostly ), but now at around 6/7k EGF I enjoy it in another way more than at.. let's say 15k or 20k, because I see more subtleties, which make me appreciate this beautiful game more. Creating damezumari, snapbacks or being more efficient (e.g. reaching 2 (or even more) goals with just one move), countering an attack and all this make the game more interesting for me. Getting to xd/k is not the main goal, but I do believe that rising in the ranks let's me enjoy more subtleties.

on b) I've heard of that being said and I'm interested if it's really true. I hope to be able to find out some day.

on c) This is definitely true for some people. I met one such person at a club. He was new and was really into the game and improved quickly. After some time (and a lot of ranks into high kuy level) improvement got a lot slower. Being rank-obsessed, he promoted himself to reach his goal of 1d (although in truth he wasn't that strong) and soon after pretty much stopped playing at all. Well, he kinda "reached" his goal, but to what price? I think, such cases are really sad..

My personal two cents on this interesting question: For a long time (quite a few years now), I always wanted to be at least 4kyu (now 2kyu), because I wanted to catch up with my boyfriend so we could play without handicap, on equal terms (and I still want that). What that (and similar stuff) did to me was that I got pretty rank-obsessed myself.. Getting stuck at 6/7k for three years now (also due to lots of university work) I finally feel that I don't have to rush it and to pinpoint it to some number. I will eventually get there someday. Until then I want to improve my fundamentals and lots and LOTS of other stuff needs improvement as well. I think in the course of this, I'll reach this goal (and hopefully rise a bit higher as well ).

EDIT: Corrected some typos..

[jts]

By the way, Bonobo, I think a 12k aware of his own limitations probably makes a better teacher than a 2k who has to teach everything to his students all at once. If you eavesdrop on teaching games in the KTL or the Beginner room, you can sometimes hear the most ludicrous things - people dogmatically maintaining positions that are flat out wrong. I've been guilty of it myself, in the past. (There's also a particular style of harangue people pick up from professional teachers, that is only helpful if you have the intuitions and reading to back it up...)

[otenki]

"When I see a move in a high dan or pro game which does something I could have never come up with myself in a beautiful, creative and/or deep way then I know why I want to become stronger."

Maybe it is just an illusion but I have felt that the stronger I'm becoming the more beautiful my games are.

When you see two people of 5 stones difference play each other and talk about the same game afterwards in a review then sometimes it feels as if they are talking about a totaly different game. It is the same game but the interpretation of what happened is different.

Cheers,
Otenki

[dumbrope]

Short-term 1-2d AGA, just to be past the middle of the pairing sheets in the US Open. Also, to begin to justify what I have spent on books.

Long-term to play in NAMT or other tournament that allows me to enjoy the ambiance of the strong players room.

[skydyr]

Short-term 1-2d AGA, just to be past the middle of the pairing sheets in the US Open. Also, to begin to justify what I have spent on books.

So long as they post them alphabetically, I will never attain this.

[dumbrope]

Short-term 1-2d AGA, just to be past the middle of the pairing sheets in the US Open. Also, to begin to justify what I have spent on books.

So long as they post them alphabetically, I will never attain this.

I meant results sheets.

[xed_over]

that allows me to enjoy the ambiance of the strong players room.

I can get you in there now, if you're willing to be a game recorder

[dumbrope]

that allows me to enjoy the ambiance of the strong players room.

I can get you in there now, if you're willing to be a game recorder

Done that. It was fun and part of my motivation. But it's sort of a bridesmaid/bride thing.

[judicata]

My personal feeling is that either:
a) people are under the impression that go is somehow 'more fun' when you are 1d (as opposed to 5k, for example), or
b) the game is somehow 'different' then, or
c) they chase after some imagined status within their local groups.

I'm sure some people think this way, but don't you think this kinda sounds bitter? Regarding your specific points:

a) people are under the impression that go is somehow 'more fun' when you are 1d (as opposed to 5k, for example), or

Go is more fun when I'm improving, and an improvement in rank is the best proxy for improvement overall that I know of (with the usual caveats for how often someone plays, etc.). I'm not saying anyone should be rank obsessed...there are plenty of threads on this topic. Setting long- or short-term goals is often motivating, and makes this hobby of ours more fun. So an oversimplified answer to the OP's question is "because it is higher than my rank."

b) the game is somehow 'different' then, or

Actually, I think the game is different. I feel like I was playing a completely different game when I was 18k, 8k, 1k (with differences diminishing over time). But More importantly, I wouldn't belittle someone's desire for a more in-depth understanding of the game by characterizing their efforts as a misguided based on what this statement implies.

c) they chase after some imagined status within their local groups.

In fairness, this isn't always imagined. It may be (or may not be) a misguided source of motivation, and it may not bring the awards one believes, but there are plenty of groups where this is not imagined.

Sprinkle a dose of levity appropriate for a hobby on these reasons, and they seem perfectly fine to me. And maybe you intended your post with that tone.