new mbt

[luke warm]

what a great idea, this might go over even better than the present set up... great imagaination guys and gals

[G_R__E_G]

I tried it out last night with Fred and Sheri (for a Canadian bridge geek like me, that was a thrill in itself). I have no complaints at all, it was an absolute blast. The new feature that lets you see how GIB will take your bids before you make them is very nice. I would highly recommend it and from a "selfish" standpoint I hope they stick with the 25 minute format (although they could add other lengths too), as it's perfect for me.

[Poky]

As I noted, playing MBT, same boards aren't played on every table... Is it possible?!? It isn't much fair if one South player plays 7NT= and another South 2H+1, for example. Will this be corrected?

[uday]

I'll correct it the same day you promise people won't cheat :lol:

No, the hands are different at every table, and this is deliberate.

[Poky]

I'll correct it the same day you promise people won't cheat :) 

No, the hands are different at every table, and this is deliberate.

It is much more fun if you can compare your scores with people playing the same boards.

 

Maybe the best solution is to run two types of BMT: one with random deals, one with same deals. So who is affraid of cheaters can play only the 2nd type.

 

Anyway, I don't think it is so easy and efficient to cheat because the only way to do it is being logged on two computers (with different IP addresses) at the same time. In both cases you can see only the South's hand, so, a big delay is needed to find out some useful information about the hand. Thus, this for sure isn't an ellegant and profitable way to cheat. Maybe some kind of time constraint and "slow-play detectors" could help to cope with this problem.

 

What do you think about it?

 

Tourneys, especially money tourneys, when one South's hand picks up 22 honors and another South's hand only 5 honors doesn't make much sense because this kind of bridge becomes a gambling not a skill game. :(

[fred]

I'll correct it the same day you promise people won't cheat :) 

No, the hands are different at every table, and this is deliberate.

It is much more fun if you can compare your scores with people playing the same boards.

 

Maybe the best solution is to run two types of BMT: one with random deals, one with same deals. So who is affraid of cheaters can play only the 2nd type.

 

Anyway, I don't think it is so easy and efficient to cheat because the only way to do it is being logged on two computers (with different IP addresses) at the same time. In both cases you can see only the South's hand, so, a big delay is needed to find out some useful information about the hand. Thus, this for sure isn't an ellegant and profitable way to cheat. Maybe some kind of time constraint and "slow-play detectors" could help to cope with this problem.

 

What do you think about it?

 

Tourneys, especially money tourneys, when one South's hand picks up 22 honors and another South's hand only 5 honors doesn't make much sense because this kind of bridge becomes a gambling not a skill game. :(

If 2 or more people play the same hands as each other then they can collude regardless of whether or not they play at the same table.

 

If people can collude then they will collude, especially if it is profitable to do so.

 

Sorry but we are simply not going to run tournaments with cash prizes if we know in advance that people can and will cheat in them. To do so would open us up to all sort of legal problems and force us to commit a lot of resources to the impossible task of policing something that ultimately can't be policed.

 

Furthermore, I am guessing that most of our members would not want to play in tournaments for cash prizes if they knew that cheating was possible. Probably a significant % of those who would be willing to play in such a game would be planning on cheating.

 

I am also guessing that a lot of our members will really enjoy playing in our MBTs despite the non-duplicate scoring. The response we have received has been extremely positive. In the small sample of bridge players who have tried these tournaments, almost everyone has said "that was really fun!". I agree - they are really fun :)

 

For sure it will help to have good cards, but:

 

1) The better players will still prevail in the long run

 

2) Try dealing (say) 15 random deals. Count how many HCP NS (or EW) have on each of these days and calculate the average. Repeat this experiment a bunch of times and make yourself a graph of the results. You will notice that you will usually get a result between 19 and 21 HCP. You don't have to increase the number of deals by much before "usually" becomes "almost always". The lesson is that it doesn't take long for luck to even itself out. MBTs are very fast, by the way. I can easily play 1 hand every 2 minutes.

 

3) MBTs include skill aspects (such as clock management and robot management) that are not part of the normal bridge experience.

 

Luck is important in any form of bridge and in some ways this makes the game more appealling (because it gives everyone a chance to win). But just like in duplicate, the skilled MBT player will win more often.

 

Our MBTs won't be for everyone, of course, but I really think we are on to someone good here.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Poky]

If 2 or more people play the same hands as each other then they can collude regardless of whether or not they play at the same table.

 

If people can collude then they will collude, especially if it is profitable to do so.

OK. I can understand you. But, what you think about this:

 

In the "Play bridge for money" area a new type of tournament could be introduced. One player against another. Both of them playing with 3 GIBs, on same position (say: South), with identical cards... Cheating is impossible (only 2 tables) and pure skill will always prevail. With every board finished, a score comparsion can be showed (or even the whole board in Movie section.)

 

It sounds to me as a great idea...

[fred]

If 2 or more people play the same hands as each other then they can collude regardless of whether or not they play at the same table.

 

If people can collude then they will collude, especially if it is profitable to do so.

OK. I can understand you. But, what you think about this:

 

In the "Play bridge for money" area a new type of tournament could be introduced. One player against another. Both of them playing with 3 GIBs, on same position (say: South), with identical cards... Cheating is impossible (only 2 tables) and pure skill will always prevail. With every board finished, a score comparsion can be showed (or even the whole board in Movie section.)

 

It sounds to me as a great idea...

We have considered this idea (2-person duplicate tournaments with 1 human and 3 robots at each table) and concluded (guessed) that our existing forms of money bridge would be more popular.

 

That is why we introduced these formats first.

 

I would not be at all surprised if we offered the type of tournaments you suggest in the future (but probably not in the near future).

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Deanrover]

These were fun. I think you are right that they will prove immensely popular.

 

Fred,

 

you said 'I can easily play 2 hands per minute.'

 

Are you serious? you can get in a hand every 30 seconds, even with 3 GIBs having to make their decisions? You could 'easily' get 50 hands in per MBT?

 

Dean

[fred]

These were fun. I think you are right that they will prove immensely popular.

 

Fred,

 

you said 'I can easily play 2 hands per minute.'

 

Are you serious? you can get in a hand every 30 seconds, even with 3 GIBs having to make their decisions? You could 'easily' get 50 hands in per MBT?

 

Dean

Sorry - that was a typo by me.

 

I meant to say "1 hand every 2 minutes". I will correct my original post - thanks for pointing this out (and thanks also for your MBT enthusiasm!).

 

I tend to play either 13 or 14 hands in a typical 25 minute MBT in which I play all the way to the end.

 

I do make plenty of mistakes that I might not otherwise make when I play this quickly, but my (early and non-scientific) opinion is that, for me, it is in my best interest to play at this speed.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Deanrover]

Currently no tournaments in play or pending :)

[uday]

( On the test server ) I create them at 5 and 35 minutes past the hour, so between :00 and :05 (and :30 and :35) you wont see any if the T that just started was canceled (not enough entries)

[keylime]

Fred,

 

Quick question with regards to MBT.

 

It looks like my BBO client, since I live in MD (not for that much longer, hence question) does NOT have the portal to enter MBT.

 

When I relocate to northern VA (which is unknown whether they permit money bridge), will BBO update itself to show the portal?

 

Once the last few hurdles are cleared, I think MBT will soar, and I look forward (hopefully, if permitted by law and improved health) to play in it.

[inquiry]

Hi key,

 

When you live in Northern Virginia, odds are pretty good you will be allowed to play MBT by the software. There certainly doesn't seem to be any need of software update on your computer to do so. Once you move to NV, if you have trouble give me a call, and I can help. When I had dial up modem service, I had a 50=50 chance of not being able to play MBT. Now that I switched to DSL, there is no problem (get DSL and surely you will have no problems).

[fred]

You will not need a new version of BBO, but you may need a new ISP.

 

When you log in to BBO, our server knows (roughly) where you are physically located (based on your IP address).

 

If this location is a place were MB/MBTs are illegal, you will not be allowed to play in these areas of BBO.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[keylime]

The new ISP from what I understand is Cox Communications (cable based) which services the southern Alexandria/Springfield/Franconia areas.

 

Thanks both of you. :D

[keylime]

Next question:

 

How much is roughly the minimum investment to get started? I can't remember exactly, but wasn't it like 50 dollars or so?

[uday]

re: money bridge

you can play in the free tables (same format as real money but it isnt money. you get $100 every time you sit down)

 

You need to be able to cover approximately 2700 points. So at the lowest stake (1/10 cent per point) that is $2.70 (at the highest stake, 2 cents per point, that is about 54$).

 

So a $10 or $20 deposit rates to be enough to get started at those stakes if the free tables aren't your thing.

[keylime]

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks again.

[jchiu]

These were fun. I think you are right that they will prove immensely popular.

 

Fred,

 

        you said 'I can easily play 2 hands per minute.'

 

Are you serious? you can get in a hand every 30 seconds, even with 3 GIBs having to make their decisions? You could 'easily' get 50 hands in per MBT?

 

Dean

Sorry - that was a typo by me.

 

I meant to say "1 hand every 2 minutes". I will correct my original post - thanks for pointing this out (and thanks also for your MBT enthusiasm!).

 

I tend to play either 13 or 14 hands in a typical 25 minute MBT in which I play all the way to the end.

 

I do make plenty of mistakes that I might not otherwise make when I play this quickly, but my (early and non-scientific) opinion is that, for me, it is in my best interest to play at this speed.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

Neat format, many thanks to Fred, Uday, and the BB Team for this invention!

 

This raises an interesting strategy question, which includes factors like

 

- How much better is a player and a GiB against two GiBs?

- How much worse does a player play when under (extreme) time pressure?

- Should a player stall or withdraw to prevent a bad board from scoring up?

 

Empirically, my results playing at 1.5 minutes per hand have been about 60 points per hand better than GiB-GiB (over close to 60 hands). At this rate, I have noticed that I play about 300 to 400 points worse per 17-board (25-minute) session than I would if playing a championship event. This is probably becuase GiB puts very little pressure on its opponents. However, I think that I would maximize my potential score in a short tournament by playing "all out" fast, so quickly that my physical reaction time and GiB thinking time are the limiting factors.

 

This said, I think the 25-minute format has a lot of luck built into the tournament definition. A longer tournament would substantially reduce the luck factor, and the incentive for players to withdraw from the event for one bad board (could even be a fix, when the GiBs make a slam). Also, with so much luck, it makes sense to divide the payouts among the top finishers fairly proportionately when these tournaments involve real money.

[fred]

A couple of new ideas:

 

1) Run MBTs where the human (South) is always dealt the "best hand" at the table.

 

2) Run MBTs where the South hand on each board is the same at every table, but the other 3 hands are randomized.

 

What do you think?

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[MickyB]

I don't like the first idea - it will encourage quick play to an even greater extent. I really like the second idea though.

[hotShot]

The GIB'S play at a good speed, and the setup is fun.

Just a few remarks what can be better.

 

Let us assume that 10 boards are played in 25 minutes, then there would be an average of 4 partscores, 5 makeable games and a makeable slam. (Note that makeable does not mean it can be bid!)

In half of the cases the slam is on GIB's side, those players have no chance to win. So luck has a big role in this kind of tourney.

This can be reduced a lot, if the worst result of a player would be canceled or if only the 10 best hands would be used.

 

If i get a good score e.g.

- slam/grand in the first board or better at the first board vul.

- make 2 games in a row

my best strategie is to stop playing. This way i will be better as those where the GIB's have a slam or a full game more than the human (about 6-7 of 10).

There should be regulation against stopping to play.

[Poky]

A couple of new ideas:

 

1) Run MBTs where the human (South) is always dealt the "best hand" at the table.

 

2) Run MBTs where the South hand on each board is the same at every table, but the other 3 hands are randomized.

Although I think both ideas are worth to implement, the 2nd idea (same hand for all Souths) sounds much better to me.

 

The only better idea I can see is to implement "tournaments" (BFM area) at two tables with same hands where one player can compete against another. Same hands, same vulnerability, same position, same opponents, only skill makes the difference...

[uday]

two tables with same hands

 

People will cheat