This is purely from myself as kyu level players point of view. Dan level players may face different issues and have different take.

I would vote for both DGS and OGS as best servers.

For live and blitz games, OGS is number #1, no doubt about that. I spent lots of
time last year at KGS and due to some life changing events that I was idle for couple of months, and later found out that I lost my rank at KGS. This was none sense.
Rank should stay with owner for life. Couple of months inactivity with severe penalty does not make sense. Although no official policy, I tend to believe OGS does not do that to its users. Further, I think OGS web based GUI is better than KGS java based GUI.

I tried IGS recently, and I actually like IGS for GUI and easiness to get games. But IGS ranking and rating system is way inferior to OGS. It needs 10 games net winning to be promoted and DDK range at IGS is full of sandbaggers and many weak players that do not feel right to me. The ranking at IGS on kyu level is not real. Ranking and rating at OGS is a lot better.

I also tried Tygem and WBaduk. It was tough to find games at kyu levels at both servers. Lots of different servers to connect and there was no automatch feature that allow proper handicap settings allowing rank restriction. The players at both place were fighters, very aggressive style. These two places may be fun for a few games here and there, but not worth spending lots of time there.

For turn based games, I would vote for DGS as best, OGS as close second. The DGS ranking system is best, fast and quick adjustment with lots of dan/kyu level bots. OGS corresponding games are comparable, but lack of working bots and ranking system is slower on adjustment compared to DGS. It is a lot easier to get proper ranks at DGS. I think DGS has this ranking system and bots edge against OGS so far.

If one truly is a certain rank, they will get it back after a win and a loss

DDK ranks can be very "fluid", unstable, and unreliable.
At higher levels, say around 3 kyu or better, the ranks become much more stable.

I would say today at DGS, rank between 20 kyu to 1 kyu are quite reliable and stable. DGS rank between 30kyu and 20 kyu are unstable because there was no robots in the past to anchor playing strength. In the future DGS rank between 30 kyu to 20 kyu could be stable and reliable too with introduction of more kyu level bots.

easy said than done. Time, effort investment on resource is tough with busy schedules.

Ranks shouldn't be thought of as a "reward" or "penalty". Ranks are there to calibrate which opponents you should play against, and at what handicap. If you're playing that rarely, it is reasonable to assume that the class of opponents you were 50% against before, are no longer at 50%. Why is it a "penalty" to be matched against the right opponent?

_________________
The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain, and simple to express: Err, and err, and err again; but less, and less, and less!

Not to try to perceive the rank as reward. The rank is coupled with playing capability and the rank should be correctly reflecting that. The owner of the rank deserve a correct number.

I kind of regretted to push so positively on OGS. Recently there has been lots of server stability issue due to upgrade. If OGS does not resolve this issue quickly, the only good choice would be KGS and DGS.

Don't regret it. It was certainly true until recently and it might well be true again in a couple of weeks.

I played couple of live and blitz yesterday with no problems. But I am still hesitate to say OGS trouble is over

I agree with that, I only play correspondence games for now until things are settled down. I am still quite optimistic that things *will* get settled down eventually.

I had similar experience with lagging on OGS a couple of days ago. But now it seems solved and even faster than before, especially it seems now much faster on mobile devices. Also it seems nowadays easier to get a game on OGS (by just opening a game request) than some time ago. Nevertheless I am not sure if I have a "favorite" server, I like to have these multiple options, also the playing styles on different servers feel different, which is good.

you probably play a lot of games. I only play a couple of live games per week. For light players like me, it is more important to find the best server to focus instead of spreading out to different places because only lots of game in one server can result in proper ranking.

I play a lot lighter than you do, and I would still suggest playing on a bunch of different servers.

I agree -- very different playing styles across the different servers.

It is understandable that a player who joins a new server and ranks himself too low can be taken as a sandbagger but that does autocorrect after time. However it is jarring to an opponent who expects reasonable competition but gets overpowered. I found myself in this position (sandbagger) and tried to compensate by playing initial stones at 1 1 points but that was taken as an insult by some. So what to do . . . ?

I have seen a number of comments about 'sandbaggers' on IGS. Are these referring to people who purposely underrate their strength? Are there more than a few ?

Don't most servers indicate a new or uncertain rank?



If you have a good idea of what your rank should be, create a new account at that rank. Or play as a guest. Or see if you can win by exactly two points.



There are people who like to beat up on weak players.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I understand how you thought of it, but it's not a great solution. It has the potential to seem insulting. But worse, if it works, you'll win 50% with the handicap and stay stuck with your rank.

As Bill said, you can create a new account. Ideally, you can just keep playing and the server should correct your rating quickly enough, which it should on OGS or KGS--IGS might take awhile, and I'm not sure about DGS.

Side note, since people were complaining about OGS stability upthread. I've been playing on OGS with no problem recently.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

I suppose it depends a lot on the person and what they are looking for. OGS certainly has the advantage of being very popular right now with English-speaking kyu players. But as others have mentioned, it has both pros and cons, including occasional server stability issues. The GUI is nice, I suppose, though it frequently doesn't work quite right in my browsers. Still, OGS has the advantage of working on mobile devices (though I haven't tried that yet). Personally I find the OGS site overwhelmingly complex. KGS has a few oddities, but at least there is complete help documentation on every feature of the site. I'm frequently frustrated that help pages are still not written for large parts of the OGS site. What does this button do? How does this feature work? What does this graph mean? When I ask these questions in the OGS forum, no one knows, and the help pages are of little help. I'm still lost on how to know in OGS if the person is still connected or not after the game. Why isn't my opponent answering me? Have they disconnected? How can I know? So I sit there waiting for a reply about reviewing the game for a while and then eventually give up.

Personally, I'd rather have "old" graphics, like KGS or DGS, which are at least simple and accompanied by complete help pages to understand everything. The KGS room system is nice when looking to see what's happening in a particular community of players. I agree that losing your rank after a bit of inactivity is frustrating, but then again it doesn't take long to get it back again, and you seeing a "?" next to a players rank is a good warning that their rank may not be accurate. OGS is probably best for the occasional user and KGS works better for dedicated players. The KGS ranking system (and "?" ranks for infrequent players) is designed to prevent sandbaggers, but it's not a perfect system. I continue to play on both OGS and KGS for live games because they both have pros and cons. I agree that DGS is absolutely the best for correspondence games.

Actually, the thing that keeps me away from OGS most of the time is not the site itself, but the culture. By default, OGS games are played without handicap and so it seems to have attracted players that prefer playing without a handicap. That's cool if that's what you prefer, but it means that if you want a good game, you have to find someone very close to your rank. Personally, I prefer using the handicap system with anyone more than a couple of stones away from my rank. It gives me a fighting chance to win if I'm weaker and it gives me a challenge if I'm stronger. This is one of the great things about go which initially attracted me to the game. On OGS, there are very few handicap games posted, so I create my own. But the culture of playing without a handicap on OGS is so strong, that when I post a game with handicap, it's usually accepted by someone who apparently didn't notice there was a handicap and then they immediately quit when they see the handicap and I have to post a new game all over again until someone finally accepts. With KGS, handicap is the norm and there is a dialog period of accepting an opponent and any modifications to the handicap; you can choose between several people who click on the game you posted and dialog with the potential opponent if there are any questions. Actually, I like being able to check out my potential opponent before accepting. With OGS, you are obliged to play the first person to click on your posted game. I suppose I should go to the OGS forum more often and seek a game there instead of just posting a game and seeing who will accept?

I suppose the ideal would be to have a modern site with nice GUI, complete documentation, a simple game agreement mechanism and stable servers. Hopefully OGS and KGS will tend in those directions! DGS is pretty much already there.