well there is the crux of the problem isnt it. lowering the dropout rate depends on the number of dedicated (aka 1 game per week or more) players in the league. about 70% or 80% of the dropouts occur in the lowest classes (delta) of the league. A lot (and i mean a _LOT_) of players sign up because they like the league and the ideas behind them and then just never come back to KGS ever again. The negative impact this has not only on the league but on the players that actually _do_ want to play league games is really big.

But how does the ASR solve a problem like this, statistics won't tell us how and you can't prospect how a person will play next month because ppl are not numbers.

it is possible to lower the number of games needed to stay but will that make the league more active or less active as a result of it, i think in case we lower the number of games to 3 we will see an increase at first but it will then slowly degenerate into what it was because ppl are pretty lazy:P

Upping the number of minimum games to 5 or higher can make the signup threshold harder for ppl but it will be a cause for more dropouts, so all in all the number wont change much.

i therefor conclude that changing the number of minimum games is not a good option and please correct me if i am wrong on this:)

Motivating players to play more is something i can only do on a limited scale, players should motivate themselves to play because this is a great game and not playing this game (you love, because you want to play in the ASR league which is meant for competitive serious games) is more disgracing to the game then playing a bad game of go. I try to motivate players by giving them prizes if i can, giving them a nice place to play games and learn, try to give them a community which is friendly and helpful and if this is not enough, what else can i do for these players?

Yes i want to lower the dropout rate to 0% if possible (impossible goal) but to keep it real 25% dropout is a goal we've tried to reach the past few months and frankly its damn hard. Also we try to reach the 20% games played each month goal, but it all depends on others to play games. If just one player doesnt play in a class this could cost us 10 or more games, multiply this by 100 dropous this is easily 1000 games thats not played. This impact on the league is huge, and players don't often see this. demotivation by others because players sign up and don't come back online leads to more players not coming anymore resulting in a bigger snowball which is ultimately the downfall of a class. Could i help this? not really...

i guess the answer to how many games is many = 4?

_________________
admin of the ASR league and KGS admin

My entirely subjective feeling is that 4 is about perfect.

If anything I'm still in favour of even bigger class sizes, but it feels like it's getting much closer now. When I've gone online, there are normally at least one or two people from classes on there.

_________________
My Go videos | My Go Teaching Ladder (GTL) reviews
I also offer Go teaching lessons
-- Creator of OGS --
"I played a trick play and my opponent fell for it, unfortunately he didn't know the correct followup, so I died"

If we stick with four games and concentrate on the issue of the very high rate of non-performance in delta for the moment, let me ask something. Do you think it would be possible to convert delta into one big bucket, where anyone could play anyone and the goal was to earn your way out of delta and into your first structured class (gamma)? It seems like it would minimize the impact of no/limited shows by greatly expanding the available pool of opponents. It would also create a sort of "probationary" status for deltas that hopefully people would want to qualify their way out of as a distinct goal (motivation). This last might also have an knock-on effect on performance in gamma as people are motivated not to lose their "permanent member" status and drop back into the great "unwashed" in delta. Have you tried anything like that in the past?

_________________
Dave Sigaty
I went to a bookstore and asked the saleswoman, "Where's the self-help section?" She said if she told me, it would defeat the purpose.
- George Carlin

The big source of complaints the league had at one point with very large classes was the crazy people that managed to fit 60+ games in a month. With only 2 games instead of 3 per opponent now, and I would have said more people complaining about the lack of availability of players as compared to the over abundance of games, I'd say give it a shot, particularly as a "Delta only" trial to begin with.

_________________
My Go videos | My Go Teaching Ladder (GTL) reviews
I also offer Go teaching lessons
-- Creator of OGS --
"I played a trick play and my opponent fell for it, unfortunately he didn't know the correct followup, so I died"

If u make one "Deltapot" the few hyperactive ppl won't count much and they'd dominate their small Delta class anyway.

So putting everyone in "the one Delta" and letting the top50 or so (normal promotions + additionals for kicks) promote doesn't sound bad.

I don't think there will be more then 10 very active ppl, so playing a moderate number of games will be ok for promotion.

The problem when I was in ASR was that it was always the same one person.

I find the suggestion to have a huge Delta where everyone can play everyone very interesting. The hyper active players as Gab said aren't really a problem since around 40 places are available approximately to promote (so the motivated people will promote anyway). I think it's a great idea to push the competition and motivate people to play more in Delta. At least there will always be someone logged to play with so no one will complain that he didn't find a classmate to play against =)! The only problem that might happen is some players who are highly ranked might not play much after since they'd think they're safe, but if we consider Delta more like a gamma purgatory that shouldn't be an issue =)!

Remember also that the top 40 or so would promote

_________________
My Go videos | My Go Teaching Ladder (GTL) reviews
I also offer Go teaching lessons
-- Creator of OGS --
"I played a trick play and my opponent fell for it, unfortunately he didn't know the correct followup, so I died"

Yeah, I've always been a fan of this idea.

posted a poll on the ASR site on the right hand side, please vote for one big group in delta or keep as is

edit: posted it here

_________________
admin of the ASR league and KGS admin

One more data point for you. If delta moves to a tub-o-players, I would strongly consider joining again. I dropped out because it was next to impossible to find games. Seemed to be due mainly to time zone differences within the classes.

Same here.

keep in mind that if this happens and you promote to gamma you are still in a 20 player group, but hopefully with more motivated players

_________________
admin of the ASR league and KGS admin

I tried voting for yes, but got a javascript error: "Please choose a valid poll answer" Do I have to vote no to get it counted?

edit: works now.

_________________
"When you are learning, it is not so important whether you are right or wrong." - Bill Spight

But what's the problem? You let anyone in, and the result is that the population approximately represents "everyone"; people join and just try it out, but they make it to gamma or beta before they quit. That's just how the system works. Now that you're finally considering the bigroom idea from a year or two ago though, please allow me to reiterate how was originally intended to solve this problem;

the "bigroom" idea is intended to only allow the most active players into the "real" league.

Let's think very carefully about what the bigroom really means. You have alpha, two betas, and four gammas. If you have 14 people in each class that is around 100 people. Say put 16 in alpha, 100 people exactly. That is the "real league". Then you have everyone else, who fight for their right to enter the real league. Ok, so if you include delta classes then you have 212 people (16 in alpha, 14 in the rest). Same point. What you are doing is placing an entry restriction on the league: "You must be at least this active, and no less active, to play in the league".

So there, you've placed an entry restriction on the league.



There are two ways out of this box; change the entry requirements or change the requirements for people while they are in the league. Again, if you let anyone in, then the league will be filled with anyone. That is both a plus and a minus. If you are willing to live with it, then it's not a minus though.

If I'm right and you are no longer willing to live with this, please consider placing real entry restructions on the league; a bigroom is a really great way to do this, as long as it is meaningful (I say make the bigroom at delta level to promote 28 into gamma)...

4 game rule is fine imo. Lets just try bigroom and see how it works out? please? ^^

Let me suggest something rather controversial. As topazg said, people are more dedicated when they invest something. So why not add a small monetary investment?

Here is how it could work: You have to pay a small entrance fee when you join the ASR and you get it back when you sign out (note: not drop out). It could be as low as 1€/1$. If you don't play the minimum amount of games and drop out, the money stays with the ASR and can be used for example to purchase lessons/prizes for league winners/promotions. I imagine this would lower the dropout rate significantly while also adding a nice bonus for stronger/more active players.

The drawback is that it would probably also lead to fewer players actually signing on as investing money is a big (mental) hurdle. There could also be some trouble if players really have problems finding opponents to play, e.g. because of time zone differences.
On the other hand, I believe that the players that do sign on will be more committed and so it will actually be easier finding games since there won't be as many inactive players in the leagues.

I got the idea because I used to play poker regularly with some friends where we used a 1€ starting fee per person which would be paid out to the winner, second place and sometimes third, depending on the number of players. It doesn't really hurt when you lose while also raising the competitive spirit of the game.

So why not make a poll to find out whether the ASR community would be willing to take such a step?

monetizing the ASR is not something we aim for, we feel the league should _always_ be free.

we have some ideas surrounding the league we might be able to ask money for but its vague and i would rather not go into it at this moment.

_________________
admin of the ASR league and KGS admin

Apparently I'm on the small side of the poll. Here are my (largely anecdotal) arguments:

1. I don't have a problem finding games in Delta VI. In fact, I already have foregone 2 occasions to play because I just didn't feel mentally up to it. I want to take the league seriously and currently I can. And I'm not online all the time.
2. If Delta merges to one big pot, I don't see the difference with the English room. I came here to find a controlled, respectable environment where I could be assured a long game did not go to waste. In a big opaque group, that feeling of mutual trust can easily vanish. With 26 people there is social control. "Oh yeah, know that guy, never mind him.
3. I saw the name of a notorious flamer among the ASR league members. It doesn't fill me with confidence that ASR will allow me to avoid the morons who regularly ruin online play.
4. Maybe with the current members you will not fall into the hyperactivity trap. But you might attract more of those.

I like the cosiness of a class of 26 people and I'm looking forward to proceed to gamma, based on a decent winning rate.

Oh, and ever thought of organizing the delta classes according to time zones?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all against monetizing. The point of the idea was that the ASR will still be completely free (under the reasonable condition that you announce your withdrawal beforehand). The ideal effect of this measure would be that every player in the league is active and so no one loses a dime. A clear win-win!

Of course I can't say for sure it'd work. I also completely understand your feelings. I probably would be thrown off by such an announcement myself. But if I think it through it seems like a fine and fair deal. After all, the least you can do to support the people who are working hard to keep this project going is to inform them that you are quitting so that they can plan properly for the next month (By the way, you can only drop out after you've already joined and therefore profited from the ASR). I also admit that I've been guilty of dropping out once in the past. Maybe a buck in the pot would have kept me going? But even if not, it would still have served to soothe my conscience for leaving without notice.

It would be interesting to hear some opinions from active ASR players on this matter.

I am not an active ASR member but I would be interested in injecting a question here. Would you volunteer to undertake the administration of such money: collecting, keeping, and non-anonymously guaranteeing the return of said money to a couple of hundred people around the world? I can only imagine this as quite a (thankless) task. What do you think?

_________________
Dave Sigaty
I went to a bookstore and asked the saleswoman, "Where's the self-help section?" She said if she told me, it would defeat the purpose.
- George Carlin