![\"\"](\"https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-forum-message-attachments/o/inbox%2F18473244%2F0ca5f5df7088424b6dd5ecf088508403%2FScreenshot%202026-02-08%20002358.png?generation=1770499592671396&alt=media\")
Hi, this discussion isn't related to this competition but I think it interests all Kagglers in general, and putting it in a competition forum would increase the reach
\nas most of you know Kaggle has a progression system, which is used as a form of legacy to indicate experience and achievements specially in the competitions track.
\n
while there are other tracks that were made for the sake of good to motivate people to add datasets, upload useful notebooks and be helpful to others in discussions, It is very clear that these progression tracks were really exploited, removing the discussions progression track was a good procedure but clearly it wasn't enough, I think that the dataset track is the most exploited one and notebooks isn't far away for it
\nsee: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/equity-post-HCT-survival-predictions/discussion/562737
\nand to people outside of kaggle they don't understand the difference between each track and this really undervalue the legacy of being a competition grandmaster for example, am not saying that other tracks shouldn't have any form of appreciation or support from the platform but I think it have to be clearly separated and different from the competition track like in the form of badges for example
\nand also people who try to exploit the voting system should be punished so that the actual contributions gets appreciated more, and I recently received many messages from linkedin from multiple people asking me to upvote their datasets which is mostly useless synthetic tabular datasets, and most of them are in the top 15 currently in the datasets track and currently datasets grandmaster which completely undervalues the hardwork of kaggle competitors
\nI am willing to hear the opinion of other competitors as I might be overthinking it
", "messages": [ { "id": "3403198", "postDate": "02/07/2026 21:45:10", "content": "Hi, this discussion isn't related to this competition but I think it interests all Kagglers in general, and putting it in a competition forum would increase the reach
\nas most of you know Kaggle has a progression system, which is used as a form of legacy to indicate experience and achievements specially in the competitions track.
\n
while there are other tracks that were made for the sake of good to motivate people to add datasets, upload useful notebooks and be helpful to others in discussions, It is very clear that these progression tracks were really exploited, removing the discussions progression track was a good procedure but clearly it wasn't enough, I think that the dataset track is the most exploited one and notebooks isn't far away for it
\nsee: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/equity-post-HCT-survival-predictions/discussion/562737
\nand to people outside of kaggle they don't understand the difference between each track and this really undervalue the legacy of being a competition grandmaster for example, am not saying that other tracks shouldn't have any form of appreciation or support from the platform but I think it have to be clearly separated and different from the competition track like in the form of badges for example
\nand also people who try to exploit the voting system should be punished so that the actual contributions gets appreciated more, and I recently received many messages from linkedin from multiple people asking me to upvote their datasets which is mostly useless synthetic tabular datasets, and most of them are in the top 15 currently in the datasets track and currently datasets grandmaster which completely undervalues the hardwork of kaggle competitors
\nI am willing to hear the opinion of other competitors as I might be overthinking it
", "rawMarkdown": "Hi, this discussion isn't related to this competition but I think it interests all Kagglers in general, and putting it in a competition forum would increase the reach\n\n\nas most of you know Kaggle has a progression system, which is used as a form of legacy to indicate experience and achievements specially in the competitions track.\n\n\n\n\nwhile there are other tracks that were made for the sake of good to motivate people to add datasets, upload useful notebooks and be helpful to others in discussions, It is very clear that these progression tracks were really exploited, removing the discussions progression track was a good procedure but clearly it wasn't enough, I think that the dataset track is the most exploited one and notebooks isn't far away for it\n\nsee: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/equity-post-HCT-survival-predictions/discussion/562737\n\n and to people outside of kaggle they don't understand the difference between each track and this really undervalue the legacy of being a competition grandmaster for example, am not saying that other tracks shouldn't have any form of appreciation or support from the platform but I think it have to be clearly separated and different from the competition track like in the form of badges for example\n\nand also people who try to exploit the voting system should be punished so that the actual contributions gets appreciated more, and I recently received many messages from linkedin from multiple people asking me to upvote their datasets which is mostly useless synthetic tabular datasets, and most of them are in the top 15 currently in the datasets track and currently datasets grandmaster which completely undervalues the hardwork of kaggle competitors\n\nI am willing to hear the opinion of other competitors as I might be overthinking it", "votes": null }, { "id": "3403256", "postDate": "02/08/2026 03:00:57", "content": "I do feel the naming for different tracks should be different. For example - A Datasets top most tier is a Kaggle Grandmaster and a Competitions top most tier is also a Kaggle Grandmaster.
\nwhen we clearly know the efforts needed for a competitions grandmaster >>>>>>>
", "rawMarkdown": "I do feel the naming for different tracks should be different. For example - A Datasets top most tier is a Kaggle Grandmaster and a Competitions top most tier is also a Kaggle Grandmaster.\n\nwhen we clearly know the efforts needed for a competitions grandmaster >>>>>>>", "votes": null }, { "id": "3403348", "postDate": "02/08/2026 10:01:17", "content": "@paritoshtripathi5 do we really need these tiers given the deluge of AI models available for them lately?\nEven competitions tier will be spoken off like this in the next few years with so much Gen AI around.
", "rawMarkdown": "paritoshtripathi5 do we really need these tiers given the deluge of AI models available for them lately?\nEven competitions tier will be spoken off like this in the next few years with so much Gen AI around.", "votes": null }, { "id": "3403368", "postDate": "02/08/2026 10:34:19", "content": "you are right but i don't think we should let go off these \"achievement titles\" just because of GenAI.
", "rawMarkdown": "you are right but i don't think we should let go off these \"achievement titles\" just because of GenAI.", "votes": null } ], "comments": [ { "id": 3403256, "author_name": "paritoshtripathi5", "author_url": "", "post_date": "02/08/2026 03:00:57", "content": "I do feel the naming for different tracks should be different. For example - A Datasets top most tier is a Kaggle Grandmaster and a Competitions top most tier is also a Kaggle Grandmaster.
\nwhen we clearly know the efforts needed for a competitions grandmaster >>>>>>>
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 3403348, "author_name": "ravi20076", "author_url": "", "post_date": "02/08/2026 10:01:17", "content": "@paritoshtripathi5 do we really need these tiers given the deluge of AI models available for them lately?\nEven competitions tier will be spoken off like this in the next few years with so much Gen AI around.
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 3403368, "author_name": "paritoshtripathi5", "author_url": "", "post_date": "02/08/2026 10:34:19", "content": "you are right but i don't think we should let go off these \"achievement titles\" just because of GenAI.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ] } ] } ], "raw_markdown_by_id": { "3403198": "Hi, this discussion isn't related to this competition but I think it interests all Kagglers in general, and putting it in a competition forum would increase the reach\n\n\nas most of you know Kaggle has a progression system, which is used as a form of legacy to indicate experience and achievements specially in the competitions track.\n\n\n\n\nwhile there are other tracks that were made for the sake of good to motivate people to add datasets, upload useful notebooks and be helpful to others in discussions, It is very clear that these progression tracks were really exploited, removing the discussions progression track was a good procedure but clearly it wasn't enough, I think that the dataset track is the most exploited one and notebooks isn't far away for it\n\nsee: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/equity-post-HCT-survival-predictions/discussion/562737\n\n and to people outside of kaggle they don't understand the difference between each track and this really undervalue the legacy of being a competition grandmaster for example, am not saying that other tracks shouldn't have any form of appreciation or support from the platform but I think it have to be clearly separated and different from the competition track like in the form of badges for example\n\nand also people who try to exploit the voting system should be punished so that the actual contributions gets appreciated more, and I recently received many messages from linkedin from multiple people asking me to upvote their datasets which is mostly useless synthetic tabular datasets, and most of them are in the top 15 currently in the datasets track and currently datasets grandmaster which completely undervalues the hardwork of kaggle competitors\n\nI am willing to hear the opinion of other competitors as I might be overthinking it", "3403256": "I do feel the naming for different tracks should be different. For example - A Datasets top most tier is a Kaggle Grandmaster and a Competitions top most tier is also a Kaggle Grandmaster.\n\nwhen we clearly know the efforts needed for a competitions grandmaster >>>>>>>", "3403348": "paritoshtripathi5 do we really need these tiers given the deluge of AI models available for them lately?\nEven competitions tier will be spoken off like this in the next few years with so much Gen AI around.", "3403368": "you are right but i don't think we should let go off these \"achievement titles\" just because of GenAI." }, "source": "meta" }