mike777 Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 "Anyway, thats my two bits. Its helpful to be able to judge players who you don't know's approximate level, for many reasons, including the ability to have interesting games against players of a similar level." Joshs, is not most of your f2f bridge over the course of a year against partnerships of random ability, many below you as well as some at your level and a few above? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigpenz Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 ratings are in the eye of the beholder!!!would you rather have a partner who won 2000 acbl points before 1970 and hasn played a tournament since or one who started in 1990 and has won 3000 since then both same say 60??? I think i would take the one from 1970 :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshs Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 "Anyway, thats my two bits. Its helpful to be able to judge players who you don't know's approximate level, for many reasons, including the ability to have interesting games against players of a similar level." Joshs, is not most of your f2f bridge over the course of a year against partnerships of random ability, many below you as well as some at your level and a few above? Actually here is a bet I would take: Take 2 pairs that I have played against in face to face bridge in the last year (in non-arranged games), chosen randomly, with weighting propotional to the number of boards I have played against them. So If I played 8 boards against one pair, and 2 boards against another, the first pair would have 4 times the chance of being chosen than the second. Also Chose 2 pairs that I played on BBO in non-arragned games (players coming to the table on a first come first sit basis, instead of my choosing my opponents), chosen in the same manner. Have them play a 30 board team match. Give the BBO team a 45 IMP handicap. I will bet on the live bridge team, thats how extreme the difference is. I would actually estimate the quality difference at about 2 imps/bd. If I took 2 pairs only from club games I have played in (which is not something I do very often since I moved to LA since the quality of the opposition is too bad) and I would still give the live opponents a slight edge of maybe 15 imps over a 30 bd match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshs Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 ratings are in the eye of the beholder!!!would you rather have a partner who won 2000 acbl points before 1970 and hasn played a tournament since or one who started in 1990 and has won 3000 since then both same say 60??? I think i would take the one from 1970 :lol: yeah thats because master points are not ratings.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 "Anyway, thats my two bits. Its helpful to be able to judge players who you don't know's approximate level, for many reasons, including the ability to have interesting games against players of a similar level." Joshs, is not most of your f2f bridge over the course of a year against partnerships of random ability, many below you as well as some at your level and a few above? Actually here is a bet I would take: Take 2 pairs that I have played against in face to face bridge in the last year (in non-arranged games), chosen randomly, with weighting propotional to the number of boards I have played against them. So If I played 8 boards against one pair, and 2 boards against another, the first pair would have 4 times the chance of being chosen than the second. Also Chose 2 pairs that I played on BBO in non-arragned games (players coming to the table on a first come first sit basis, instead of my choosing my opponents), chosen in the same manner. Have them play a 30 board team match. Give the BBO team a 45 IMP handicap. I will bet on the live bridge team, thats how extreme the difference is. I would actually estimate the quality difference at about 2 imps/bd. If I took 2 pairs only from club games I have played in (which is not something I do very often since I moved to LA since the quality of the opposition is too bad) and I would still give the live opponents a slight edge of maybe 15 imps over a 30 bd match. So if I get your drift you are saying "your" weighted random f2f club players are about .5 imps per board better than your actual random bbo opp and "your" f2f weighted random tourney players are about 2 imps/bd better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 12, 2006 Report Share Posted October 12, 2006 The point is something like this: (1) Partnerships faced in real life are usually real partnerships. Even if they've never played together before, they have spent more time discussing agreements than most online pairs. They're also likely from the same part of the world, so agreeing "standard" is more meaningful. (2) People playing face to face bridge are usually more focused. It's not 3AM for them. They're not doing five other things at once. (3) When Josh plays in real life, he tries to find strong games. He's not just going to the club on a random night. It's pretty clear that the field in open pairs in a regional tournament will be better than a random night at the club, because people tend to self-select (and because US regionals offer many concurrent limited events). When you combine these things together, it's fairly evident why the real life opposition will be stronger than the online opposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 I agree with Josh and Adam about the difference between online and f2f bridge. I've been playing bridge online for at least 15 years, and the impression I have always had is that players don't take it as seriously. When you play at a club or live tourney, you have to make a special commitment of the time. And you're less likely to bother if you don't have a regular (or at least familiar) partner. Online bridge is often something you do on the spur of the moment, in your spare time. Notice that online tourneys are generally short -- when OKbridge used to run 26-board tourneys, they found that attendance was really poor because few people wanted to commit 3 hours to online bridge (they replaced these full tourneys with pairs of consecutive 12-board mini-tourneys whose results are combined, with rankings posted for all the pairs that play both halves of the "combo" -- about 25% of the attendance of each mini). The casualness with which people regard online bridge also explains some of the behavior you see, like leaving the table the instant your partner does something you consider stupid. Of course, this doesn't mean that all online bridge players are not serious about the game. I have a regular partner who I've been playing in the Sat night OKbridge tourney every week for several years (but we started as f2f partners after being introduced at an NABC), and we see many of the same partnerships every week as well. But we also see lots of pick-up partnerships who are still deciding what they're playing as they move to the 2nd round! Many serious (and champion-level) players consider it a great way to practice, but what they're practicing FOR is f2f tourneys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 A problem I have had (and I'm sure we all have had) is that when I play with my regular partners, I want to play against partners - mostly for the reasons mentioned above (droppers, two randoms being poorer than either one with a practiced partnership, rudeness), but also because I play non-standard systems (Precision, EHAA, weak NTs in North America) and I don't like beating people with no countermeasures up. Plus we're going to get more droppers when they realize what they have got into. I wish I could set up a system where I could say "seats are closed individually, come with a partner and I will set you up." It would be nice also to be able to register a partner so that one could come to a table and say "we are requesting *both* of E-W". Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigpenz Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 ratings are in the eye of the beholder!!!would you rather have a partner who won 2000 acbl points before 1970 and hasn played a tournament since or one who started in 1990 and has won 3000 since then both same say 60??? I think i would take the one from 1970 ;) yeah thats because master points are not ratings.... ah but in the olden days masterpoints were a good form of rating until they started selling them...that was my point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTodd13 Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 A problem I have had (and I'm sure we all have had) is that when I play with my regular partners, I want to play against partners - mostly for the reasons mentioned above (droppers, two randoms being poorer than either one with a practiced partnership, rudeness), but also because I play non-standard systems (Precision, EHAA, weak NTs in North America) and I don't like beating people with no countermeasures up. Plus we're going to get more droppers when they realize what they have got into. I wish I could set up a system where I could say "seats are closed individually, come with a partner and I will set you up." It would be nice also to be able to register a partner so that one could come to a table and say "we are requesting *both* of E-W". Michael. In the tinker toy system I implemented, this is how I did it. There is no such concept of an individual sitting down at a table. The first thing you do is find a partner and once you have a partnership you can find a list of other partnerships to play against. In my system, you could disband the partnership at a MBC table anytime you wanted but the system would stop you from leaving in the middle of a hand. This is a little bit of an improvement but what you really want is an established partnership and it is difficult to implement something with that kind of requirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zasanya Posted October 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 A problem I have had (and I'm sure we all have had) is that when I play with my regular partners, I want to play against partners - mostly for the reasons mentioned above (droppers, two randoms being poorer than either one with a practiced partnership, rudeness), but also because I play non-standard systems (Precision, EHAA, weak NTs in North America) and I don't like beating people with no countermeasures up. Plus we're going to get more droppers when they realize what they have got into. I wish I could set up a system where I could say "seats are closed individually, come with a partner and I will set you up." It would be nice also to be able to register a partner so that one could come to a table and say "we are requesting *both* of E-W". Michael.When I wanted to play seriously I arranged team matches and canvassed in the lobby that I would include only pairs.I usually got 3 in quick time.I kept track of the regular pairs included them in my Friends list and now when I want to play seriously I can usually get the serious pairs.BTW you may contact me if you want to play seriously.And where can I find a link for EHAA? 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.