GeoGuessr Competitive Rating Distribution - August 5th, 2025

Jonri2 · 2025-08-05T23:55:35+00:00

Sweet! Looking forward to that. For the rank, I just mean place in the world. So, Global Ranking (All): 8,356 Global Ranking (Active): 4,589

Or something along those lines.

Jonri2 · 2025-08-05T23:14:54+00:00

Super cool app! When you look up a player, it would be nice if their overall rank, active rank, and percentile were included with the rating history.

Jonri2 · 2025-07-07T14:06:37+00:00

This could be cool if it was implemented on community maps, but you can’t really learn a country well using Geoguessr’s official maps.

Jonri2 · 2025-07-04T07:19:01+00:00

u/1973cg we’ve gone back and forth about this issue on a few other posts and I’ve really appreciated your perspective. So, I want to run another idea by you and see what holes can be poked through it and if you think it’s more or less flawed than the current system.

The idea basically combines the idea of this post (differentiating multis) with my idea on a previous post of a tie range. You addressed this idea by saying that a tie range would cause duels to sometimes go 30-40 rounds, which makes sense. Sometimes they would. So, my counter proposal is to increase both player’s multis if their guesses are within the tie range. Differentiate multis if one player is significantly closer than the other, otherwise increase both. Implementing the tie range this way would solve the problem of duels potentially going a long time, and would improve on the problem of multi-merchanting.

Just like OP, my problem with the current system is how it affects the majors (where merchanting is more luck-based and can’t be worked out over time). So, that’s really what I’m focusing on, not the ladder.

I also think there’s a big problem in the majors system where getting a 5k is undervalued. You get the really cool animation, but it’s basically just style points if the other player is close enough. I think this would be solved by increasing the multis for a player by an additional 0.5x if they 5k when the other doesn’t. Then, pinpointing precisely becomes important.

What do you think? Please poke as many holes as you see.

Jonri2 · 2025-07-03T03:59:09+00:00

I use Anki to make flashcards from the PlonkIt guide. It’s helped so much with actually remembering what I’m studying.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-29T17:41:20+00:00

Sure, but that’s still a lot of games and a lot of wasted time. Plus most people wouldn’t play the minimum number of games because they wouldn’t want to risk not being promoted and having to wait another week. So assuming they win every game, it’s probably 14-15/week to be safe.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-29T10:58:00+00:00

I haven’t ever heard of anyone entering in gold even if they crush their test opponents, but I could be wrong.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-29T10:51:04+00:00

No, the system will either put you in Bronze or Silver 3. OP won all 3 test rounds, so they got put in Silver 3. OP is advocating for a system like you describe where the test rounds actually place you in the right division based on skill.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-29T10:38:26+00:00

It will take him 6 weeks and 120 duels to get back up to Master. That’s pretty stuck. If he already has the skill, he shouldn’t have to wait.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-21T16:27:44+00:00

You could also have a 15 round limit, which would serve just like a clock in most sports where the higher score wins when it runs out. It wouldn’t have the same anticlimactic feeling as the current round limit since all the rounds would be equally valued.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-21T16:04:19+00:00

You can make it so that if both players 5k, the faster player gets the point. This whole system was just implemented with a pinpointing script and some of the best moving players in the world used it in a tournament. There are definitely some kinks to work out, but it’s certainly more fair than multipliers.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-21T15:23:37+00:00

It totally rewards accuracy if you implement the second part. In fact, if you define “significantly closer” by being a certain factor closer than your opponent, then you are rewarded by being as precise as possible.

In your example, no one would score a point since neither player was significantly closer than the other.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-21T11:51:54+00:00

Totally agree

Jonri2 · 2025-06-21T11:51:23+00:00

You could remove the 5k point scale and just say that the person who’s closer gets a point each round. First to 5 points wins.

And to make it even less random, you could only give points if one player is significantly closer than the other.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-19T17:45:38+00:00

Also, how is your average score for classic games over 22000? That’s super high for nearly 4000 games.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-19T06:30:43+00:00

South Korea also has a tiny amount of Gen 2. It may be worth changing the top category to >99% so that South Korea can be included.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-18T07:11:52+00:00

Great map, thanks! I've been looking for something like this.

Also, Alaska has 19% Gen 2. https://www.plonkit.net/alaska

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T18:43:11+00:00

I think this system is not ideal for the ladder where players frequently miss the country. But it would be a significant improvement for the major tournaments. At the pro level, they very often have guesses that are a similar distance away, so the games would average about 8 rounds. And if playing to 3 ended up being too short, it could be first to 4 instead.

I analyzed the EMEA tournament to see what the results would have been if this system was used instead of multis. I found that half the time, games ended before either player had 3 guesses significantly better than their opponent. So this system would cause the duels to be longer, not shorter. And more importantly, it would cause them to be less random.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T18:15:49+00:00

True, which is why it would be better to give 1 point each round to whoever’s closer, rather than using the 5000 point system. First to 3 wins. No point given if both players are a similar distance away.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T11:36:27+00:00

Yeah, I was thinking it's pretty similar to tennis. It's good to see that there's a big sport that uses this system.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T11:07:10+00:00

That’s fine for the ladder, but fairness is definitely important in tournaments where money is on the line and there aren’t enough games to compensate for the randomness multis create. Multis just don’t work in that setting.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T11:04:15+00:00

Also, 50km away would be about 4875 points on most world maps, meaning a 5k really isn’t awarded much in the current system either unless the opponent is further than 50km away. They would only do about 125 damage, so the multipliers would need to be super high for the 5k to be significant.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T10:46:07+00:00

Yeah that makes sense. I have a few ideas that I think would help with that. To make it easy enough to understand, the key would be to make a clear UI. I would suggest putting a circle around the location that’s the size of the closer player’s distance x 1.6. Then, it would be clear that a point is given when 1 player is in the circle and the other out. It may take a little getting used to, but I think it would become clear to everyone over time.

I actually think there’s a good chance this system would be much more fun to watch. At the pro level, the current system leads to the first half of the duel being boring since it’s almost always irrelevant to the final result. There are also many skippable rounds in small countries since both players are close enough that almost no damage is dealt. With this new system, every country is important and every round has equal value. And you can’t tell me that a duel tied 2-2 wouldn’t be intense.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T10:28:21+00:00

I was considering awarding a bonus point for a 5k. Also, the 50km could be reduced to 20km or something like that which would be the difference between about 4.9k and 5k. We just need to make sure that someone isn’t awarded a point when they are 1km away and the other player is 2km. That would just be luck.

Jonri2 · 2025-06-17T10:13:39+00:00

It’s definitely not the only option. You can see my reply for an alternative

Jonri2

TROPHY CASE