cherdano Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Where I get confused is all this talk about "Including" MOSCITO. Is there any formal definition regarding what it means to be "Included"? More importantly: Assume for the moment that MOSCITO is not "Included", but I have a complete FD file documenting MOSCITO sitting on my hard drive. Can this file be used to automate alerts? Certainly. Not being "included" just means that it won't be part of the system files downloaded with every version of BBO, and presented as a ready made option when choosing a system file.Everybody will still be able to download Wiley-Moscito.bss from some place on the internet and use it for play on BBO. Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Where I get confused is all this talk about "Including" MOSCITO. Is there any formal definition regarding what it means to be "Included"? More importantly: Assume for the moment that MOSCITO is not "Included", but I have a complete FD file documenting MOSCITO sitting on my hard drive. Can this file be used to automate alerts? Certainly. Not being "included" just means that it won't be part of the system files downloaded with every version of BBO, and presented as a ready made option when choosing a system file.Everybody will still be able to download Wiley-Moscito.bss from some place on the internet and use it for play on BBO. Arend I think you can save your opponents convention cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke warm Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 i understand what richard is saying re: modular development, but i don't understand why it is a bad thing, even at this stage of the game... for example, i'm almost through with a game forcing 2♦ stayman convention, not that i think many will use it but because i think *some* will (and more will want to experiment with it, given the number of weak nt players)... i've focused more on conventions, myself... this is because there isn't a lot of agreement as to what should make up a complete system (ben's sayc example comes to mind)... that way, it seems to me, a pair can agree 2/1 in principle and add bergen raises, etc if they want of course i could be way off base with my understanding of what's wanted/needed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 i understand what richard is saying re: modular development, but i don't understand why it is a bad thing, even at this stage of the game... for example, i'm almost through with a game forcing 2♦ stayman convention, not that i think many will use it but because i think *some* will (and more will want to experiment with it, given the number of weak nt players)... I can picture an "ideal" world in which players can build a logically consistant system by assembling a series of seperate modules. For example: I would start by selecting one of a variety of chaisses: Option 1: Strong Club, 5 card majors, 13-15 NTOption 2: Strong 2♣, 5 card majors, 12-14 NTOption 3: Three way 1♣, 5 card majors, 15-17 NTOption 4; Strong club, transfer openings, 11+ - 14 HCP NT After which, I start adding on a few crucial conventions Keri over 1NT openings2/1 Game Force + Forcing NTGazilliTransfer advances after overcallsYada, yada, yada Stir it all together, add in a bit of love, and voila...A complete Full Disclosure file is available This is a wonderful extrapolation of what COULD be done using FD type technology. However, for now its a pipe dream. The chaisses aren't available. The convention modules aren't there. The GUI does have any of the necessary heirarchies build it. (How do we explain that 2 way Stayman, Keri and Scanian are all NT response strutures, but Bergen raises are used over Major suit openings?) I suspect that that for this type of system to work, the FD file format needs to become a lot more complex. (You might want to include vaiables such that ranges change based on whether people are playing a weak or a strong NT). In short: It's not ready for prime time... I think that wide spread deployment of this type of complex functionality would be a recipe for disaster. I have no problem if "Power Users" want to experiment with modular system. However, the success of FD depends on widespread adoption by the great unwashed masses... (You know: The folks who find it too difficult to load the current Convention Cards). Providing these people with a complex system doesn't benefit anyone. "There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. " - Machiavelli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.