Vilgan Posted May 31, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 I don't think "unrestricted regional wins" are actually recorded anywhere as things stand. At some point I noticed people advertising how many "regional wins" they had and wanted to look myself up for comparison (no I do not keep track) and there was no real way to do it. So perhaps this particular qualification would be hard to set up retroactively. And there is also the fact that people actually use their ribbon quals, so presumably people have "earned" a few more than they currently "have" (and I'm not sure the ACBL records anything but the current number available). But the ACBL web page records platinum points (and they don't decline over time) so I don't really see what the issue would be about using them for title requirements. Aren't score files from regionals kept in Memphis? I know we have all our club games going back ages, sort of figured the ACBL would do the same with the regional files. If so, writing a program to parse all of those files and add "regional wins" to each person as appropriate would not be hard. If the game files of old regionals are not stored, it would be pretty much impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 You'd have to eliminate platinum point section awards in pair events, too. I've got a few platinum points and have never sniffed at an overall award in a open national event. As they are currently awarded, they can be accumulated through attendance. So you had actual success at a national event, and earned some platinum. This seems okay to me. If you had to get 5 platinum for the "Expert Bronze Life Master" as described a few posts ago, would you feel motivated to keep entering national events? I think so. It would provide something to shoot for and be motivated to acquire. No, I did not have "actual success". I have a few section awards in nationally rated open pair events. An average player will happen into those if they play in enough events. If I had to get 5 platinum points for "Expert Bronze Life Master" I would already have fulfilled the requirement. Personally, platinum points and any associated rank change would not add any extra motivation to enter national events. I recognize that I am an atypical ACBL member in this regard. As far as Blue Ribbon Qualifications go, I have more of those than platinum points. I cannot remember all the events in which I earned a Blue Ribbon Q. If Blue Ribbon Qs were significant, the Qs would be memorable to someone like me who has fewer than 2000 masterpoints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 ...If so, writing a program to parse all of those files and add "regional wins" to each person as appropriate would not be hard.... As you say, the technicalities of the sort of things you're talking about are - well - not necessarily trivial, but certainly easily in the realm of the doable. The two main problems are usually more to do with 1) getting agreement on the implementation details and, even more to the point, 2) is there truly the will to start in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 <thread hijack>sort of, anyway... does anyone think that different forms of scoring should have separate types of award? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 :) Again exactly what problem are you trying to solve? I just do not see any urgent ratings problems that need to be solved. People do not go to f2f bridge because of time, money or work, or family issues. They may not go to a tourney if it is in a cold place. I think the number who quit f2f bridge because of ratings are a tiny tiny number. We have Platinum and seeding points for top class and for all the rest of us we just try and win and have fun. I friend of mine just went over LM. He is thrilled. He played on an all player under 1000MP KO team that beat an all players over 5000 mp team. He is thrilled.........and I was very happy for him, I know he put in alot of time and effort to do this. No new rating system is going to make him happier :) We play for the fun and enjoyment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcurt Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Just wanted to add that I think platinum points are a much better measure of skill than blue ribbon Qs, and they're way harder to get. For some reference, I have about 85 blue ribbon Qs and about 1150 platinum points, and I consider myself someone with reasonable success at nationals. To me this just means that blue ribbon Qs are very diluted now as well, but platinum points are still tough to get and should be used in some of the higher ranking levels. But I mean really I agree with the 2 system format, one that is like chess rankings (that takes strength of field etc) or batting average for masterpoints or whatever, and one that is just regular masterpoints. Even the WBF has a 2 system format where one is like career points and one is points that decay over time. I like that as well, but the ACBL would need to add in a strength of field component too (which the WBF doesn't really need since their events are all world level). My take on why the 2-system format isn't happening is very simple. There is a sizeable majority among the the powers that be that do not want a system without an attendance component. As others have pointed out, as regionals trend increasingly toward KOs having a decent rating system is more important. An alternative would be the league mandating that there be, say, a play-in Swiss on Tuesday where the top 3 placings entitle that same team or any majority of their players to demand a spot in the top bracket of any later KO at the regional. When I was still playing f2f (I stopped for family and job reasons, hoping to play my local DC 2009 summer NABC) I was fairly burnt over this whole thing but I was a pretty extreme example of someone badly rated by mps. Curt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilgan Posted June 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 People do not go to f2f bridge because of time, money or work, or family issues. They may not go to a tourney if it is in a cold place. I think the number who quit f2f bridge because of ratings are a tiny tiny number. I can think of 7 local players who quit shortly after hitting LM or scaled back their play significantly. Lots of people are goal oriented, and without a goal to work towards they are less inclined to put in time/money/effort. Admittedly, the "point" is to have fun and enjoy ourselves. However, from a participation and revenue aspect, losing players is never a good thing imo. Friend of mine is a fairly standard example: She retired from her engineering/management position a few years ago at 53. She started looking for things to do and got into party bridge. Then she found duplicate, and for ~2 years she played a LOT as she accumulated her gold/silver/black and total points to hit 300 points. Along the way she also won the district NAP B's (aka not a clueless LoL). Since hitting LM she has reduced her play considerably to about 1 time per week (with many weeks where she plays 0 times) and 0 out of town tournaments. She still enjoys the game, but her energy is now focused on improving her golf game and getting into the 90 stroke area. The main issue is that she (and lots of others) are goal oriented. She put lots of energy into bridge while there were goals looming. Once she hit the LM goal, the next goal was unattainable (National event win) so she moved on to other interests. Anyways, long/verbose response. But I did feel that stating that only a tiny few people quit due to the system is not an accurate statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 If your assessment is correct, Vilgan, and I think it probably is, then the solution to keeping more people playing is more desirable/attainable goals between LM and winning a National event. Apparently the Bronze LM, etc. goals aren't good enough. It strikes me as kind of like the "National Defense Service Medal" aka the "gedunk" medal ("gedunk" is Navy slang for junk food) aka one of many "BTDT" (Been there done that) medals the military hands out. Not really an award worth striving for, not really an accomplishment to be proud of. "I went to a North American National Championship Tournament, and all I got for it was this lousy Life Master pin!" :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Not really an award worth striving for, not really an accomplishment to be proud of. this is true, but what fraction of the population actually plays bridge? the point of getting a LM for these people is to impress the others at dinner parties and other fancy events. "oh, my wife is a bridge life master." or whatever... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Does the Netherlands count women's events in the MP system? The two should definitely be seperate. Yes, but they get less MP than open events, for example if the open team wins in Pau that'll count for more MP than if the women's team wins there. Neither scenario is outrageous :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 :) Again exactly what problem are you trying to solve? I just do not see any urgent ratings problems that need to be solved. People do not go to f2f bridge because of time, money or work, or family issues. They may not go to a tourney if it is in a cold place. I think the number who quit f2f bridge because of ratings are a tiny tiny number. I don't think anyone has claimed that the masterpoint system is driving people away from the game. I just think it would be more enjoyable if our ranking system reflected actual ability. Masterpoints are used for quite a few things: 1) Bracketing KOs.2) Flighting and stratifying players.3) Pairing up partners and teammates at the partnership desk. In the first two cases, it forces players to play up when they're not qualified, which can be frustrating. It can also allow players to play down -- expert rubber bridge players who don't play much duplicate will have few masterpoints. In the third case, being paired up with a partner who can barely follow suit is not much fun if you were expecting someone of reasonable expertise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Does the Netherlands count women's events in the MP system? The two should definitely be seperate. Yes, but they get less MP than open events, for example if the open team wins in Pau that'll count for more MP than if the women's team wins there. Neither scenario is outrageous :) I would consider it outrageous (as I do in ACBL as well). Women's events shouldnt get platinum points, or whatever category that open events also get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Does the Netherlands count women's events in the MP system? The two should definitely be seperate. Yes, but they get less MP than open events, for example if the open team wins in Pau that'll count for more MP than if the women's team wins there. Neither scenario is outrageous :) I would consider it outrageous (as I do in ACBL as well). Women's events shouldnt get platinum points, or whatever category that open events also get. What about junior events? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Does the Netherlands count women's events in the MP system? The two should definitely be seperate. Yes, but they get less MP than open events, for example if the open team wins in Pau that'll count for more MP than if the women's team wins there. Neither scenario is outrageous :) I would consider it outrageous (as I do in ACBL as well). Women's events shouldnt get platinum points, or whatever category that open events also get. What about junior events? What are these junior events that you speak of? If there were such a thing as a junior event in the ACBL then no, it definitely should not award platinum points. Neither should seniors. I think we should introduce pink points and grey points for this problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h2osmom Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Mixed events? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 4, 2008 Report Share Posted June 4, 2008 Mixed events? Plaid points. 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.