Deanrover

Uday, I guarantee you will have to deal with angry emails on the issue of disconnect protect. Edit: You actually wording your post very subtlely (and well). If your proposed solution involves having 4 GIBs finish the hand BUT the disconnector gets penalised in addition, that might be the least imperfect solution. You should still keep open the option of adjusting the score if you judge a player to have potentially unfairly gained from disconnecting.

Is there any time limit ? I don't see any displayed prominently. You mention that for disconnects you will use some automated system to find out the result. Are you going to implement this to remove any incentive to disconnect? I can envisage a scenario where a declarer has only a few tricks left but has lost track of which previous cards have been played - he knows the contract is 100% cold but can't remember who discarded what, so he disconnects and lets Gib play knowing full well the bot wont have made such an error.

I notice that GIB stars playing his cards VERY quickly (i.e. instantly) towards the end of the hand. Is it possible that timing inferences can be drawn? If so, you should consider implementing a (randomised) minimum time that GIB takes for its plays. A couple of seconds would be sufficient.

To answer which has more luck - poker or bridge, is an extremely complex question, but I'll give it a shot. Note: I am comparing total points bridge with 6 max limit hold em. Using other types of bridge scoring and other types of poker WILL produce different results. My hypothesis is thus: If a poker player makes $x/ hour, and a bridge player of the same ability plays at a limit which also enables him to earn $x/hour, then whichever player's earn rate has the higher standard deviation is playing in the more 'lucky' game. Restated, If a winning poker player has a standard deviation of $x/hour, and a bridge player of the same ability plays at a limit which also provides him with a standard deviation of $x/hour, then whichever player has the lower win rate is playing in the more 'lucky' game. A fast 6 max limit holdem table will get 100 hands in per table. A very good player will earn 2 bb/100. His standard deviation will be 18 bb/100. Both these figures are approximate but come from databases on 100s of 1000s of hands. So a poker player who earns $100 per hour per table will have a s.d. of $900 per hour per table. Uday mentioned earlier that the average standard deviation per hand was 300. I will assume that the s.d. is the same for every player. So a player who wins on average 50 points per board will have a s.d. of 300, as will one who loses. This likely approximates reality. Assuming 9 hands per hour (quite possible when playing with GIBs), this gives an hourly standard deviation of 900. So: a bridge player playing for $1 a point will have roughly the same hourly variance as a poker player playing $25/50 6 max. I've already said that a very good (but not world class) poker player will make $100/hr/table at these limits, so: if a very good (but not world class) bridge player can average more than 11.11 total points per board edge, over the long run, then total points bridge is more skillful than 6 max limit hold 'em. I have no idea what a good player's edge is like in bridge, but I would expect it to be considerably more than 11 points per board. *Disclaimer* I haven't done any math of this type for 21 months so it might be horribly wrong, in which case my whole post is nonsense, sorry.

I am really shocked at you who suggest that lowering the rake will attract a larger client base. The demand for online $ bridge will be extremely price inelastic. The serious players will care about it, but BBO will be operating a monopoly so their choices will be limited, the casual player won't know/care about it, after all what is 10 cents when you just won a $10 pot? I don't understand where some of this talks about 'fairness' come from. BBO are offering a service that isn't available anywhere else, they don't force you to use it. If they want to charge a fee of 200% of the pot then that is perfectly fair, if you don't like it then don't play. I suspect BBO will charging a small % fee of the pot, perhaps capped at x$ per hand, where x <=5. They will want to charge a fee which allows the good players to maintain a healthy enough edge to keep coming back, and which doesn't depleat the fish's resources too rapidly - this will likely be the profit maximising strategy. As for whether to have a higher rake or to charge transaction fees - from a purely economic standpoint the latter is almost certainly preferable, but economics tends not to take into consideration psychological factors which would suggest pursuing the former strategy. If BBO feel like being nice perhaps they will offer 2 options: i) Just a rake, ii) The client pays transaction fees but receives a % reduction in rake. The casual player will almost certainly prefer the first, but the regulars will go for the latter.

I'm looking to test this out right now. While it is nice to be the only person logged into BBO again, I can't play on my own!

I am surprised to hear that. Cricket rules! Sure, but I didn't think it was that popular outside the Commonwealth!

I am utterly astonished at the love for cricket displayed in this thread.

1. Boxing 2. Football 3. Snooker 4. Rugby 5. Cricket I expect to be schooled in American sports when I emigrate there this summer :)

Train? On that note, what time does the public transport run in Chicago? In London it all shuts downe by 01:00 which really sucks :)

Economics PhD :) What is the live music scene like out there? I'm a fan of a good jazz club, classical/opera music + rock/indie stuff. Will I get lots of this in Chicago? Any chance of getting it in Evanston? How long is the journey between the two?

I have been offered one, waiting to hear from other places before making a decision, although I'm coming out to have a look in 3 weeks. Being by the Lake sounds fantastic, in the summer at least :D

Might be moving there in 4 months (actually Evanston, ~ 10 miles away). What should I expect? Good place to live? :D

I didn't know you got the British version of Coupling in the U.S., thought you remade it. Never will understand why you insist on remaking excellent shows. Coupling is excellent, but the last series was dire (no Jeff has something to do with it). The Office is quite possibly the best T.V. show ever :D

I might be there, but I havent played for a while and will likely be too weak for you. I checked out your website and see you are a scrabble officianado. Do you know my friend Andrew Perry? He came 3rd in the World Champs a while back. Dean

I saw the title of this post and thought he had died. For once, it is nice to be wrong.

This problem has existed since time immemorial. It is very likely one of those "very simple" changes that are a programming nightmare to implement. Would be nice though.

Hi Uday, I think you can protect against this if you only allow people who have been members for x amount of time do this. Dean

I think I read somewhere that the standard deviation of bridge deals is about 5.5 IMPs/board. So in a 64-board match, you are looking at about +44 IMPs. So you would need to win by ~88 IMPs for it to be significant. Do you have any idea how much the edge a team of 4 experts would have over 4 average players in terms of IMPs/board? Final piece in the jigsaw!

That's not quite the same thing. He might be saying that the differential between his bridge ability and the 'average player''s bridge ability is much greater than in poker. But then, it might also be true that my friend is a (relatively) better poker player than bridge player. He knows that he makes more money more reliably playing poker than he does playing bridge. We're back to the power of perceptions again... This guy's skill levels in poker and bridge are analagous. WE can go some way towards solving this by using some simple maths. Does BridgeBrowser have an option to find out the standard deviation of a player's IMPswon/board?

A friend of mine who plays poker for money (successfully) and is also a good bridge player claims there is considerably less luck in poker. Well, it depends on the form of poker and form of bridge being played, but in general I strongly believe your friend to be wrong. I asked this question to a recent Bermuda Bowl participant who is a very successful poker professional and he said " had that one a few times - i have a much bigger edge playing bridge against average players "

Hog, good luck with your new start in life. Thailand is indeed an amazing place. I think you would be wise to stear clear of Bangkok as it is dirty and busy. Chiang Mai is an excellent option. Have you ever been to Kanchanaburri - that is my favourite Thai city and I think you should check it out. Thai massage every day, boating down the River Kwai, eating the most amazing food from market stalls for $1. Good times.

4 Clr would be nice

BBO legend Benedicte "Patapon" Cronier was a member of France's winning Venice Cup team. This win makes her a World Grand Master, an amazing achievement for someone still young! Bene is also the nicest woman you could hope to meet, and I couldn't be happier for her.

- Ranking systems - EV of partnerships (in terms of IMP/board) and variance.