Which auctions seem best?

[han]

Your ratio of useful:bad posts is so awful that I don't feel I owe you the same respect that I owe Ben.

For instance?

 

This is a silly argument along the lines of All elephants are pink - this animal is pink, therefore it must be an elephant.

 

trust me, I did the math - it was correct

 

Does anyone apart from me disagree with that? I think it's overly simplistic.

 

There is another way, Frances. Mikeh seems to allude to it indirectly.

 

Believe it. It's a raw measurement.

 

I'm not in the least pissy. But as usual the piss-artists focused on the one error they could see - my bid, which wasnt even the subject of my original post.

 

(and Bridgebrowser backs this up, i can hear the doubting cries of "rubbish" already)

 

Yes, I find your attitude offensive. Certainly not to be answered in its current truculent state.

[awm]

Not to add to the flames here, but just a random comment...

 

It seems like one of the big selling points of bridge browser is the hand data which is taken from BBO (okay the older data is from OKB). This data would seem to belong to BBO, and Fred has graciously decided to allow members to browse it for free via myhands (of course, making hand records available is probably an important selling point for a site promising to provide online bridge).

 

Nonetheless, bridge browser makes its money at least in part by selling databases of these hands. And it's also being advertised pretty heavily on the bridgebase forums, including by one of the moderators of the forums.

 

All things considered, I'd hope that BBO receives some cut from this.

[Guest Jlall]

You have no credibility.

I asked you (in another post here) which post *I* made advertising BRBR,

 

Instead you answer about Ben who you respect, and fail to answer my question instead substituting an ad hominem attack.

No, actually I replied to your posts in sequential order. First you called Han out for being overly sensitive (lol), then you said that you think Ben has made his posts not to advertise bridgebrowser, but because he finds those things interesting. So I replied to those in order. Obviously we are posting at the same time thus there is some lag in the time that one of us posts and one of us replies. What a thinking person might do is realize that their posts are being replied to in order, and only say their post has been ignored if it was passed over for a later post.

 

What bad post(s) did I make?

 

If you define "bad" as advertising, which is what people saying since there has been a MASSIVE amount of advertising for bridgebrowser recently by mainly Ben, but also you, and proportionate to number of total posts then your only posts except 1 have come here:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=24264&hl=

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=24319&hl=

 

and in this current thread.

 

Or is this merely your impression bolstered by an unpleasant experience at NABC where you behaved like a p*g and I called you on it?

 

LOL. You are really making me laugh now. First you call Han "overly sensitive" then you refer to an issue of which I had totally forgotten and bring it up on a public forum. Why do you bring this up? Since you chose to bring it up I better tell the whole story:

 

I was playing with a non ACBL member who was playing in real life for first time. He had played on BBO for a while, was fairly competent, and I chose to try and get him into duplicate by playing (for free) with him. He was obviously a novice at live bridge. I got there 30 minutes early, explained how alert procedures worked in real life and how dummy is put down and cards are called for, how bidding boxes work (I know this sounds funny, but these things are not intuitive if BBO is your only training ground). This was not a serious event, I believe it was a 1 session board a match.

 

We sit down against the typical asshole you encounter in this sort of event, the kind that make people not want to join the ACBL. I explain that my partner is new to live bridge etc etc. We have the auction 2S p 2N (alert). It is ogust. The asshole demands to see our convention card... oops we don't have one. HOW CAN YOU PLAY OGUST WITHOUT A CONVENTION CARD? DIRECTOR!!!!!!!!! My partner has no clue what is happening. This guy demands that we can play no conventions (you know, bad players always want to gain advantage this way through litigation etc. I'm sure if my partner had claimed without stating pulling trumps on some hand he would call the cops too). At this point I'm outraged, and I tell this jerk what I think of him. I tell him that he is the reason that people do not join the ACBL. You know, you always hear the stories "I went to the duplicate club but the people were really unfriendly, I think I'll stick to kitchen bridge." The director says ok whatever, just fill out your card whenever you get a chance. I say ok. We finish the board and are quite late given all this drama, and the asshole won't start the board. He demands I fill out a card RIGHT THEN lol. I do so in about 15 seconds and he demands to look at it. I made sure to write ogust in. lol.

 

Guess who this asshole was? You goit it! In fact I had no idea until he told me like a year ago, I was like whatever... and had actually forgotten about it until now.

 

SFBP will you grow up? You are a sad man with a sad story about how he cannot make money. You are not entitled to make money. You have a bad idea. Just because Mikeh thinks that your program has no value the way you are presenting it does not mean anyone wants to hear your sad story. You will continue to have no credibility on the forums if your only posts in the past year are about bridgebrowser.

 

Han is not being overly sensitive and I am not attacking you because of some incident that happened 4(?) years ago. Mikeh is not out to get you. We are simply tired of this ridiculous spam.

 

What advertisement did I make about BRBR? (AFAIK the posting I did here was purely followup to feedback from people who tried BRBR on Saturday).

 

Yes, it was followup. I'm sure you will argue you are providing value. But the point is any time you post a link or screenshot or details about bridgebrowser, you are advertising it. When your friend and/or business partner in homebase keeps creating posts about your product and you then follow up, you have just advertised. Enough please?

 

What justifies your sarcasm "a heartwarming story"? I told you facts. You appear to imply (dangerous ground here) that I am in some way embroidering. I am not.

 

I didn't mean to imply you're embroidering, not that that would be dangerous ground lol. I meant to imply no one cared about your story of deserved failure (and before you say it, not deserved because you are a jerk, deserved because you do not market your product well. You don't even appear to understand where it could provide value.) Sorry for the confusion.

 

Don't think you can win this one, Justin. Apologize.

 

If you say it enough times it might become true, keep trying! Maybe even use CAPS, it will be more scary and look more true!

[Echognome]

I don't really see this as an ad for BRBR.

I think you are either being very coy or naive or lying through your teeth. I think Ben has a lot of creditability, because he has contributed and invested into this community plenty. But I'd like to hear it from his mouth that he didn't intend to mention Bridgebrowser without an ulterior motive. I would have thought Ben would be unabashed about it to be honest. Nothing wrong with selling a bridge product. But at the same time, when people say "please don't flood us with advertisement," you must think they're big fools when you say "but we weren't advertising." I think you're just going to make people resent you for it.

 

I did try out the software. I actually didn't say anything, because I didn't want to give you negative press. I respect you are probably doing this as a labor of love. If you want my constructive criticism I am happy to give it, but you didn't ask for that when the trial was made available. I'm assuming you just wanted to test the server.

 

I also didn't care for Ben's criticizing people for their poor searches. When I try out new software or most any other gadget, I don't want to sit there and read all of the instructions. I want to dive in and mess around with it. Good software will be intuitive and easy to use. I mean if you are criticizing Adam for a search (and Adam knows more about computers than all but a handful of us), then how is the average user supposed to know? I personally think the posts could have been much more helpful. For example saying, "We could have made it easier or clearer for you to do such a search." Maybe it's the designers fault rather than the users? Has that ever been considered?

[cjames]

Seems for me like Justin won this.

[sfbp]

You have no credibility.

Your side to the story justifying your disgustingly rude behaviour that even Barry Crane might have been ashamed of (and he had an atrocious reputation for rudeness and unpleasantness) in no way vitiates your obvious disregard for your opponents, even by reading your own description.

 

I had the temerity to stick up for my rights. You clearly believe that your rights are to ride roughshod over others and your own account clearly indicates that.

 

As for your comments that I have not contributed much (except BRBR) I would ask you how much you contributed to the game of bridge with the following hand:

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1201402467

 

Not to mention the week I turned you in for bidding 7NT maliciously.

 

Have a nice day.

[helene_t]

5,6,7 and 10 seem ok although one of them used a 3♠ bid over 1NT that would be NF in "standard", hopefully p understood it as forcing.

 

Other than failing to open the North hand, some conceal the spade support after having passed the North hand thereby risking 2♥ in a 5-2 fit while 4♠ is on, some use blackwood opposite an unlimited hand, and one used blackwood in a situation where 4N should be quantitative.

[Guest Jlall]

You have no credibility.

Your side to the story justifying your disgustingly rude behaviour that even Barry Crane might have been ashamed of (and he had an atrocious reputation for rudeness and unpleasantness) in no way vitiates your obvious disregard for your opponents, even by reading your own description.

 

I had the temerity to stick up for my rights. You clearly believe that your rights are to ride roughshod over others and your own account clearly indicates that.

 

As for your comments that I have not contributed much (except BRBR) I would ask you how much you contributed to the game of bridge with the following hand:

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1201402467

 

Not to mention the week I turned you in for bidding 7NT maliciously.

 

Have a nice day.

If this was really all you could come up with to discredit me, you did a pretty poor job.

 

I mean you should at least bring up the time I got drunk in a midnight game once and was thrown out of the game! I might have even been belligerent. That is a much stronger play than this post :)

 

1) Clearly we both think the other was a big jerk in the situation. If you really believe that you handled the situation correctly against a new player in an event that is not even regionally rated then more power to you. You were right under the letter of the law, I was required to have a convention card. Did you ever wonder why you got no adjustment, and why you couldn't get us barred from playing conventions? It was not a big deal, and you were not damaged at all. You were just trying to gain advantage any way possible, and you did indeed succeed in getting a new player to not consider becoming an ACBL member.

 

2) If you think I consistently show an "obvious disregard" for my opponents, I would like to ask how many boards you have played against me? I remember only those 2, but I wouldn't know you if I saw you so lets say 10. Do you think that is a reasonable sample to make any conclusion? Would you agree that very few people feel this way about me given that I am a bridge professional and my image counts for a lot, and I cannot get hired if I show disregard for my opponents? Isn't the collective total of my opponents a much larger and more accurate sample size with which to draw conclusions?

 

3) I don't really mind my 6C opener tbh. My partner was a total beginner (high school student just having fun and playing some bridge though she has no idea how. She likes to win :), my opps were advanced/expert, and I was white/red. There was no chance I was going to have an auction where my partner was going to be able to judge what to do, so I was going to have to guess. I decided 6C was a good shot as maybe they will lead wrong, maybe they will misguess the defense, maybe it will be a save against them, maybe it will be cold, or maybe it would goad them into bidding (how do you bid after a 6C opener?) In fact I think it was the best bid under those conditions. Even if it wasn't, it can't be too far off, and I think some members of this forum would bid it some of the time (hrothgar?) and it's a good thing to experiment with against friends on BBO. Actually a good bridgebrowser test would be to see my imp average with jendab and jmill, the 2 total beginners I play with for free on BBO to try and promote junior bridge. I think I do amazingly well with them, and they are both now taking real classes becuase they had so much fun.

 

Really you could find some much better examples of me doing ridiculous things from a combination of boredom, drunkness, anger, etc. You should use bridgebrowser to find those. I restrict myself to team games now, since I only play those with/against friends and cannot skew any results (except bridgebrowser searches) this way, and I have good understanding friends, several of whom also steam at times.

 

4) I'm glad you feel gratified that you caught me doing something wrong and were able to turn me in :) You are a good cop! :) I hope bidding a malicious 7N is the worst thing I ever do. I DID used to play sessions late at night with my friends where we would psyche routinely, and might even devolve into opening 7N on every hand. This is clearly wrong in MBC, and I was reprimanded for it. Honestly it was pretty stupid of me not to figure this out, but I was like 17 and I made a mistake. That was definitely not the worst mistake I ever did, and after fred talked to me about it/banned me I realized I should restrict stuff like that to playing with GIB or playing a team game so as not to upset the curve.

 

5) You really question what I have contributed to bridge and or the forums? I don't even feel the need to answer that since I think that the other forum members know the answer, but that is really funny. Maybe I will contribute something by beating the Nickell team tomorrow GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

 

But maybe not if I'm up all night. l8r

[inquiry]

Not to add to the flames here, but just a random comment...

 

It seems like one of the big selling points of bridge browser is the hand data which is taken from BBO (okay the older data is from OKB). This data would seem to belong to BBO, and Fred has graciously decided to allow members to browse it for free via myhands (of course, making hand records available is probably an important selling point for a site promising to provide online bridge).

 

Nonetheless, bridge browser makes its money at least in part by selling databases of these hands. And it's also being advertised pretty heavily on the bridgebase forums, including by one of the moderators of the forums.

 

All things considered, I'd hope that BBO receives some cut from this.

Let me start off by saying that I will never mention this product in these forums again by name, and I will only respond to people in threads like this one if they mention it or ask about it.

 

Let me follow up by pointing out that I have never suggested anyone go to the website where the browser is "sold" and pay for it. Let me further point out that the advertisements for it here (I will accept that characterization) is for a free version and that people who gain access to either version through playing in homebase do so with BBO making more money off them than the owners of homebase. That is a fact. I will not share with you the pricing scheme Fred charges organizations per table, but take my word for it, with the organizations giving out cash to winners etc plus paying BBO fees and paying directors (if not directing themselves of having volunteer directors) bbo makes out fine.

 

Let me also note that EVERY BBO yellow gets free 100% access to the program I am not mentioning by name. That is the hook that gets BBO to share the data with Stephen. The yellows can use that data for whatever purpose they see fit. It was therefore somewhat odd when two yellows wrote for the free day access. In replying to them, I reminded them that free access was one of several benefit BBO offers those who are yellow.

 

I will say that I thought I was being sensitive to concerns like those expressed in this thread, by trying to keep the threads bridge related. Apparently I was not. At one time I added a large red signature touting that program, I meant to leave it up a week, I left it somewhat longer, but once I realized it was there too long, I took it down. I am not removing the homebase signature or my avatar mentioning it. In this particular thread, so one, I think richard, but not sure, asked if you could find all the auctions for any one hand. I replied either publically or in an PM/email that it could not be done. Then while looking at the hand in this slam, I noticed that those who bid the slam, all bid it differently (hand play 39 times, 10 bid slam). I found that curious, and in messing with it, I stumbled on the way to print out all the auctions (or selected ones). I found the hand and auctions interesting enough to post. After posting, I came back and added the mention of the program as an aside to address the earlier issue.

 

The recent flurry in mentioning the program was in preparation of offering it free versions of it for one and all. In part because of a commonly, and I happen to believe mistaken, view that the data contained is useless (the garbage in garbage out syndrome). The first step in the moving to free data and the expected influx of users who will use it if it is "free" was the trial just a few days ago to make sure it wouldn't crumble to its knees with a lot of new users hammering on it. The program was written as a standalone product, and then adapted to server client product, so a lot of people banging on it at once is a reasonable concern.

 

I had thought we would just throw it open to one and all, but stephen shot that idea down for a good reason (see my first and second post in the thredd announcing the free trial). The other free offers (which were going to be posted in this forum, but now for obvious reasons will not be) are occassional free days, much like the free GIB days on BBO (but not monthly), the addition of millions of "older" bbo hands to the one version that is always free to anyone who plays just once in homebase even as a sub, and basically free access to the full version for regulars or the homebase tournaments. Because of the concerns of BBO regulars expressed in this thread, anyone wanting to experience any of the free trials will now have to figure out where to find announcements of them (registering at the address in my signature will probably work).

 

In closing, I like the product. I used it before it was free to all yellows. I still use it weekly, and often daily. I use it to find interesting play hands, interesting hands for testing bidding conventions, to examine the bidding of players I wish to emulate, and of players whose auctions confuse the hell out of me. I use it to examine partnership tendencies when I am going to be a commentator on Vugraph, and I am working on the database of hands for it made up of ONLY vugraph hands played on BBO (or grabbed from other public online databases). Anyone who had been clever enough in their trial to find out how to find only BBO team games, would have also uncovered things like "ACBL team trials", "ACBL Women's team trials", "bermuda bowl" , "Arboned teams" "blue ribbon pairs", "cap gemini", "cavendish" and more than a dozen other events, including "world junior teams" and ending in "world open pairs". These use to be turned on, so they were accessible, they are currently turned off, but there is an initiative to get the vugraph data "fixed" and turned these back on.

 

HAving someone struggle with "it" (the program) is useful, because I know the growing pains it takes to become experienced using the program. Many of the yellows tried it and then gave up. Often for the same reason that 1eyedjack and awn expressed frustration with it. When you try to extract specific data without using first using the brd shape/hcp tab to generate specific indexes it can be quite frustrating.... I know that I went to bed many times with it churning away and woke up the next morning and it was still going. Now I know that is the WRONG way to do it, but no doubt every user will try it that way at first, because the right way is FAR from obvious, despite being explained in the help files. Like the other users, I didn't read the help files until after I said "this is just too stupid, there has to be a better way." The first free trial showed the program, for the most part, can stand up to larger numbers being logged on. Now I need a beta tester(s) to help me with what key info we need to provide users before turning them loose on the program.

 

So in this, my final comments on this subject, I hope stephen will agree with me to allow awn (should he want it) at least several weeks of free access to the full database. The reason being as noted we need some beta testers to hammer away at it, and while he is skeptical he seems the most willing to give it a decent and fair trial. An open minded skeptic is perfect for such a trial. I am perfectly willing to allow him to post his observations (good or bad) here, but given the current climate, I would suggest he post it on the homebase forum to avoid pissing off those who are alergic to even a mention of the program. I will also be more than willing to offer advice to him daily, and if he gives me his phone number, talk him through any glitches he might encounter (although it is more useful if he finds confusing things first, then I help, so I can understand where users might go wrong). If awn doesn't want to do this, I will pick someone else, preferrabley in the US to try (US so I can call them if need be). I had thought we would offer the beta tester option to the small cluster of people I sent unsolicited the initial password to for free access (for example this group included han, justin, and two others), but from the tone of their post and stephens in this thread, it doesn't sound like they would be interested in being a beta tester, nor does it sound like stephen would allow them even if they were. :(

 

(A PS... Stephen is in fact losing money on server version of this program, as he has very few real customers. In fact, he was considering shutting it down sometime ago, which is why I got involved with him and homebase. I am totally selfish here, I want the site to stay up, and continually to be updated, because i use it. So I came up wth the homebase idea as a way to try to generate income to pay for the fees of keeping the server open).

[cherdano]

Ben, I think you are slightly overreacting. What got people annoyed are posts where the bridge issue just seems to be used as an excuse to mention BridgeBrowser. When anyone thinks he has found out something useful about bridge using BridgeBrowser (which is not the same as finding out a new way to do more efficient searches with BridgeBrowser, or making a post consisting mostly of explanations how to do XuZV with BridgeBrowser), then he/she is certainly welcome to post it here.

 

This is a bridge forum, not a BrBr forum.

[gnasher]

I hope no one minds if I return briefly to the subject of bridge.

 

Youre right I didn't notice it got wrongsided (it's a good slam from the right side I think). 10 was actually the worst auction for this reason :)

 

That being said I think that each call in context of the others was most logical in auction 10, and I don't really like the auctions that didnt investigate how the clubs mesh

Suppose that they'd had the equivalent auction without the wrong-siding problem:

 

1♥ 1♠

2♠ 3♣

4♠ 4NT

5♥ 6♠

 

I don't think that opener's 4♠ promises a club card, Obviously, one reason for accepting might be that his hand has improved, but it's also possible that he has a maximum without any particular club fit, but worth an acceptance on power. Do you still want to be in slam opposite that?

 

For example, what about these examples:

 

Axx AKJxx x xxxx

Axx KJxxx AQx xx

Axxx KJxxx AQ xx

[pclayton]

The plugs for BrBr are only mildly annoying to me, but I'm probably getting mellow in my middle age. When I looked at BrBr during one of the free trials, I thought it was a little cumbersome. In fairness, I think I've asked Ben in the past for some data through BrBr and the information was interesting even if it was only anecdotal.

 

I hate to stifle any kind of innovation, but at the same time I don't think anyone owes Stephen anything for developing the program. So Stephen lost money developing it - hey we all got our problems. I just don't spew my guts on BBF telling people about mine.

 

I've thought about writing a bridge book. In the end, I'm sure it would be nothing more than a hobby and I would not have any expectations about the commercial success of it.

 

I believe Justin about his story. I've come up against assholes like that at the table and it really rankles me. Stephen isn't exactly denying this happened, which is sad.

[awm]

Axx AKJxx x xxxx

Axx KJxxx AQx xx

Axxx KJxxx AQ xx

A few points on this:

 

(1) Surely bidding 3♣ is better than bidding 4NT, which is what basically all the other auctions did.

 

(2) While accepting the 3♣ try doesn't absolutely guarantee a club card, it's very likely to include one. And I don't think accepting with ♣xxx is reasonable, so at worst you will find partner with doubleton of ♣Jxx and hopefully make on a finesse.

 

(3) I'm not convinced that the first of these hands is really an accept. You have only three card support and four small in partner's side suit (which is often a suit like Kxxx or QTxx). A singleton is nice, but it's not at all clear this is a "working singleton" and partner will often have only two diamonds on this auction (singleton is much better opposite xxx than opposite xx).

[mikeh]

As someone who played a minor role in precipitating the flame war... I want to echo Justin's praise of Ben for his contributions, and I would not, for a moment, propose or endorse a prohibition against the use of BRBR data to illustrate a bridge point, as has been done in the past. I did perceive, correctly or otherwise, a recent increase in both the frequency of reference and the length of the posts (screenshots, and numerous auctions) that seemed to me to be intended to demonstrate the ability of the programme to come up with data... but not, in my view, data that was meaningful in the context of this forum. As an example, in the 10 auctions that formed the basis of this thread, very few of them would be viewed as at all acceptable to an expert panel... consider the number that began with pass by a clear 1♥ opening bid.

 

The OP wasn't intended, it seemed to me, to prompt a discussion of how best to bid these two hands, but, rather, to demonstrate that it is possible to extract from the data all of the auctions that led to slam (I am not saying that the OP purported to actually produce ALL of the auctions, but presumably it has the power to allow that).

 

I just don't see the relevance of that power to understanding the game, as opposed to gleaning some limited insight into just how weak the overall online field is. Which brings me back to my point about BRBR, a point apparently shared by others.

 

But I am morally certain that BRBR or some similar programme, if it permits the appropriate searches, can be used constructively... and, when it can be, I welcome reference to it from Ben, Stephen or anyone.

[han]

I believe Justin about his story. I've come up against assholes like that at the table and it really rankles me. Stephen isn't exactly denying this happened, which is sad.

I agree with that. I also think Stephen should never have brought it up, it is extremely poor style. Same goes for the bridge hand where Justin opened 6C, that is none of our business. If you ever post a hand I played as a personal attack then I will take serious offense.

[inquiry]

I also didn't care for Ben's criticizing people for their poor searches.

I take strong exception to the characterization of what I did as "criticizing people" for poor searches. This is simply not what I was doing. 1eyedjack complained about something stephen did to him. I explained what happened, and why stephen did it.... and that it was an offer to help. If we had given each user his own login name, stephen would have know who 1eyedjack was and sent him an email or private message directly to offer help. Since he didn't know who he was, he did it this way (the offer to han was different, stephen was able to determine who han was somehow based upon ip address I think).

 

Likewise in awn's case, it was the same thing. I explained his situation was exactly the same as 1eyed'd and there was a better way (ie, orders of magnitude faster) to do the search. If both are allowed to complete, they will give the same data. This is not, at least in my mind, remote close to being critical I even mentioned that I too have done searches the "hard way" (ok the "wrong way"). Those searches work, but I think 1eyedjack expression about going to bed to let it do its thing is a good description of the amount of time those take. When using "the program" if you build your index of the hands you want, you can find all the hands in a database that match your criteria in a few minutes... if you set your criteria too broadly so that it finds hundreds of thousands of hands, of course, that will take much longer. One advantage of the current small free program, even "wrong way" searches take no time at all... there is just too few hands to make it so painfully slow.

[sfbp]

Stephen isn't exactly denying this happened, which is sad.

I am denying his version of it. Absolutely.

 

I think Justin's self-serving account speaks for itself, if you divorce the rhetoric from the facts.

[gnasher]

(1) Surely bidding 3♣ is better than bidding 4NT, which is what basically all the other auctions did.

Yes, much better. My point was that having bid 3C and had the game try accepted, responder would still like either to hear his partner cue-bid CK or to ask his partner about his suitability for slam, which is not the same as suitability for game.

[sfbp]

If you ever post a hand I played as a personal attack then I will take serious offense.

I have already taken serious offence at your attacks on me. Certainly you won't ever be invited to try BRBR for free again, and if I had you coming to me begging to be a customer, I would turn you down.

 

'Nuff said.

[jdonn]

and I have good understanding friends, several of whom also steam at times.

LIAR!

[jdonn]

I think Justin's self-serving account speaks for itself, if you divorce the rhetoric from the facts.

Could you give your account? It certainly looks bad for you the way he told it, but I try my best to withhold judgment till I hear both sides of a story.

[han]

Ouch, I was hoping I would be asked as beta tester for bridgebrowser but I guess I ruined that. Shake hands?

[sfbp]

Ouch, I was hoping I would be asked as beta tester for bridgebrowser but I guess I ruined that. Shake hands?

Obviously you're joking :D

 

In any event BRBR is not a beta-test product, and I apologise to anyone who received that impression. I doubt that it will make it to version 3 unless I win the lottery.

[han]

OK, I accept your apology, let that be the end of this flamewar.

[Echognome]

I also didn't care for Ben's criticizing people for their poor searches.

I take strong exception to the characterization of what I did as "criticizing people" for poor searches. This is simply not what I was doing. 1eyedjack complained about something stephen did to him. I explained what happened, and why stephen did it.... and that it was an offer to help. If we had given each user his own login name, stephen would have know who 1eyedjack was and sent him an email or private message directly to offer help. Since he didn't know who he was, he did it this way (the offer to han was different, stephen was able to determine who han was somehow based upon ip address I think).

 

Likewise in awn's case, it was the same thing. I explained his situation was exactly the same as 1eyed'd and there was a better way (ie, orders of magnitude faster) to do the search. If both are allowed to complete, they will give the same data. This is not, at least in my mind, remote close to being critical I even mentioned that I too have done searches the "hard way" (ok the "wrong way"). Those searches work, but I think 1eyedjack expression about going to bed to let it do its thing is a good description of the amount of time those take. When using "the program" if you build your index of the hands you want, you can find all the hands in a database that match your criteria in a few minutes... if you set your criteria too broadly so that it finds hundreds of thousands of hands, of course, that will take much longer. One advantage of the current small free program, even "wrong way" searches take no time at all... there is just too few hands to make it so painfully slow.

Maybe I should have used the term critical rather than criticize. You did at least help them.

 

This is a poor design for a search...

 

However, I don't have a grave concern, because you did spend the time to help them.