OldPlayr

This looks to be the "known issue". Reported 4 years ago & still not fixed? Why have the My Results panel if it is broken?

In BBO robot duplicate, the "My Results" panel will not show either bidding or play for "other tables". The only way to see it is to use results under My BBO.

I have found robots to be by far the most enjoyable table mates on BBO. They always finish the hand, bid consistently, never complain, never give advice, and never insult anyone. Perhaps this will change as AI implementation improves. I await the day when two robots auto-insult one another on BBO :)

Two reasons why I play with chat hidden. Flaming and partners who second guess bidding and play after the fact.

Just hide the chat window. I've done that for years. It makes for a much more enjoyable experience. I'll occasionally enable chat when playing with the robots, but they never say much :)

The problem that I was experiencing ("Error in download file - No deals found") was caused by DDS not finding the folder containing the BBS.html file that was downloaded by the browser. The file was in the browser download folder, but as I'm running Linux, DDS could not find the folder. Thanks to help from "1eyedjack" the developer was able to quickly do a new release today(V11.31) which has a box at the bottom of the download window where one can specify the path to the correct browser download folder. Solved my problem. Quickest software product support that I've ever encountered :)

Cookie gets saved - no login on re-visit. BBO.html does have the hands in it when viewed in Chrome. I suspect that DDS is not finding the download location. I'm running DDS, BBO, and Chrome in Linux (Ubuntu-Wine). Any way to tell DDS where to find the downloaded file?

DDS takes me to BBO, where I log in. After a bit, I get the message "Error in download file - No deals found". An HTML file (BBO.html) does show up in my Chrome downloads folder, which I can view. DDS seems to not be able to use it. I cannot find a way to tell DDS to open that file.

I enjoyed DDS, but it DDS stopped working for me quite a while ago when BBO made some sort of change. I tried again. After installing the latest version today, I get "No deals found" when trying to download BBO results. I could not find any kind of support forum.

As I've said in other threads, the “find me a table” function would benefit greatly from improvements allowing better matching of partners. Better matching would not completely solve, but would certainly help improve the situation discussed here. Allowing one to specify the preferred bidding system would be a start. This would need improvements to profiles to select bidding systems. (Why not drop the “skill level” attribute and replace it with a bidding system selection?) Allowing one to specify keywords in potential partner profiles would help. (“Find me a partner with SAYC in their profile”) Even a “don't pair me with a partner with a blank profile” option would help would help. Software matching approaches today can be wonderful. The current BBO profile model is pretty much worthless. Upgrade it to be useful.

What about simply an option to specify "Keyword in profile"? Better than nothing. Once in use, players might even develop the habit of modifying their profiles accordingly. The current process is clearly not useful. Certainly better than the useful advice above to "not use it".

Any small search feature added to 'help me find a game' would be a help over the current completely random partnering. Even a simple keyword match in profiles would be an improvement. Let me specify 'acol' or 'sayc' and get only partners with search hits in their profiles. By no means perfect, but better than the nothing that we have today. People would learn to put keyword in their profile to help, if they used HMFAP.

Skills ranking is a tricky business. "Help Me Find a Game" could at least match players who play the same bidding system. It would not be that difficult and the approach could range from a simple general bidding system check-box to a more elaborate process using bidding system and other conventions played to try for a better match. Pairing people who play different bidding systems is just dumb! What are they supposed to do? I find myself jumping back and forth from tables to "Help Me Find a Game". I get assigned, then check the partner's profile. If is is blank or a system that I do not play, I jump back and get assigned again. This is a waste of time for me, and cannot be too nice for the tables that I jump in and out of without paying a hand. If I could simply get assigned to only partners who play SAYC, for example, I'd be much happier & willing to take my chances with varying skill levels. At least I'd know what bidding system we were trying to use :)

Playing individual games on BBO, to quote Forrest Gump, is a “box of chocolates – you never know what you're going to get”. If it matters that much to you, only play with a regular partner or with partners that you are familiar with. Otherwise, chill out and smile at whatever happens. It's only a game! Self-ratings are worthless. Complicated rating schemes are usually flawed. Anyone who is as good as many people here claim to be should be only be playing for money. Money games rate themselves. As for me, I have no partner, so I play only in individual tournaments and pick-up games in the main club. When I lose, it's obviously due to a poor partner. When I win, it's clearly my skill. Having poor players out there is key – winning all the time would be boring :D :D :D

While playing a tournament, I was having problems with my mouse freezing. I waited until the end of a round, where I had a 4 minute wait, and restarted BBO. I was logged back in in not more than a minute, but was not reconnected to the tournament. Does BBO not handle reconnects? (Poker sites seem to manage this with no problem...)

The problem could be solved, and the site made much more attractive, if improvements were made to the 'Take me to the first seat available' function to allow selection of partners based on bidding system. This has been suggested here many times, but no improvements have been made. I suspect that this is because the core folks here who make software decisions all play with regular partners and never are forced to use this function. Life as a nomad individual player is not easy on BBO :D When you get assigned a partner with a blank profile, or unfamiliar bidding system, what are you supposed to do? The only alternative is to jump back out & roll the dice with the 'take me to..' function again. Trying to use the 'view tables' function is near useless, as seats come & go so fast. By the time you have viewed a profile, the seat is likely gone. Trying to start a chat dialog on bidding conventions with a new partner with a blank profile is not productive for anyone at the table. As a result, I usually have to jump in an out of many tables before finding a partner profile with SAYC. (Imagine if I played a less popular system, like precision!) An alternative to improving the 'take me to a seat' function would be to have rooms or tables set aside for specific bidding systems.

A BBO client app running on a set top box, like Roku, would be nice. Sit & play on the big TV!

I'll again vote for improvements in the ability to find a partner who plays a specific bidding system. This suggestion keeps coming up ---for a reason!

Not complaining - just made a suggestion on improving partner assignment (The title of the forum is "Suggestions for the Software", correct?) I feel that there is opportunity to improve seating options. Having to go to a table, check a profile, and then try to start a dialog hoping to get an answer (in a common language) on what conventions to play leads me to believe that there must be a better way, hence my suggestion here.

One would think that someone who was fluent in everything with write something to that effect in their profile, instead of leaving it blank? I've seen profiles like that - "will play your system". Blank to me is a sign to find another partner. If I have to ask or guess, I'll go elsewhere.

I've been trying the 'view open tables' option. I'm just not quick enough in trying to view profiles before taking an open seat. Open seats come & go too fast. I still hold to my suggestion that options could be added to 'take me to a table' to improve the partner matchups. @1eyedjack - I've not had luck trying partners with blank profiles. I don't believe that blank means 'I'll play any system' - rather it means 'I'm too lazy or new to fill out my profile' :) In any case, taking the advice here, I've curbed my table hopping in favor of frustrating speed-clicking attempts in 'view open tables'.....

Looking at open tables is not any easier than 'take me to a table' jumping, maybe more inconvenient. Some improvement could certainly be made to the process of finding a game. Ideas: based on number of logins (eliminates drop-ins or beginners) based on conventions played. I realize profiles are not structured - how about profiles that contain a keyword, like "SAYC" or "Precision" or "ACOL"? Better than nothing... based on skill level (not to reopen the skill level debate :rolleyes: ) on country (would help those wanting a specific language) Longer-term, improvements to profiles could open up a lot of better selection options. Not having to write the code, I have loads of ideas..... :D

I'm probably a guilty party. With no way to specify the conventions that one plays, the only way to find a partner who plays the same bidding is to drop to a table, look at the profile, and leave if a mismatch. How anyone can bid with a partner who's profile is blank, relative to conventions is a mystery to me! I must jump in several tables before finding someone who plays SAYC, like I do. I never bid or take any action, just jump in, read profile, and jump out. Is that a bad thing? If so, consider fixing the 'take me to a seat' function to allow some selection criteria based on conventions.

Another vote for allowing me to play the hand, instead of the robot. No value in sitting there watching cards fly past. Get some practice play.

Is it possible to make the RSS feeds from the forums more granular? The current feed is an "all or nothing" feed that tracks all forums, including all language-specific forums. The result is a feed that is essentially useless. The ability to subscribe at the individual forum level would make RSS feeds usable.