Masterpoints

[SoTired]

So a person who is proud of their accomplishment is not as good as someone who does not care whether they win or lose?

 

So being proud of winning a gold medal at the olympics only proves that you are not that good????

 

Is that your logic?

 

What a bunch of rubbish.

[matmat]

So being proud of winning a gold medal at the olympics only proves that you are not that good????

I think the point is that, generally, the good players don't feel the need nor the desire to flaunt their accomplishments.

[jdonn]

So being proud of winning a gold medal at the olympics only proves that you are not that good????

I didn't say anything proves anything. I said I see a correlation. You don't have to act so offended by it. I didn't when it was suggested I felt that way to "make myself feel big by making others feel small", which seems a more fitting accusation of people who brag about their accomplishments if you ask me (I don't believe Fred was accusing me of anything, he was just stating how it would look to him).

 

Questions: Who do you think is (justifiably) more proud of reaching 300 masterpoints, the intermediate who has toiled at the club for 20 years, or the Italian 10 time national champion who comes to the US for the first time and tears a national to pieces? Who do you think would be more likely to shout "300 masterpoints" in their BBO profile?

[TimG]

I think that the reason people put XLM or Y BRQs in their profile is not so much because they are proud of or bragging about their achievements*, but because these things are something that potential pick up partners can relate to. We all know that self-ratings are essentially meaningless. People could lie about their masterpoint total just as easily as their skill level, but I think people view the two differently.

 

 

* They may well be proud of their achievement, but I don't think that's why they put it in their profile.

[gnasher]

There is a difference between pride and ostentation. Pride is a personal matter, and doesn't require any public announcement. Summarising your bridge achievements in your BBO profile is the online equivalent of having a T-shirt printed with a list of your best results and wearing it every time you play.

 

If the idea is to get a better game or to discourage unwanted criticism, that's fair enough. If the purpose is to impress, intimidate or provide authority for criticism of others, it is, to say the least, unattractive.

[zasanya]

Unfortunately, bridge is different than almost any other game/sport. If you are an expert bowler, chess player, baseball player, tennis player, sudoku player, or whatever, and you walk into a game with strangers, it will not take long for them to recognize your abilities. Not so with bridge.

 

A top expert could play at a local game for weeks and except for a pattern of success (which may not even occur), no one would recognize his expertise. ............

This is of course a digression from the subject of the original post and I generally

do not post if I disagree with a comment strongly,Yet I must assert here That I think an expert bridge player is recognized as easily as an expert would be in any other field provided the observers have some understanding of the game.If the observers are all novices then perhaps what you say is true but most bridge clubs have players above the novice category.

[brianshark]

Whenever we achieve something, we all want to show it off a little. It's human nature to seek the approval and admiration of our peers. What's the point being great if no one is about to recognise our greatness! :)

 

I believe the vast majority of people who do advertise their achievements do it for the above reason, not to 'rub it in' or fake authority or anything like that.

[geller]

Bridge is a team sport. Like any team sport we want some quantitative evaluation of individual performance (our own and others). Masterpoints give one such scale. Some sports lend themselves to easy statistical evaluation of individual performance (baseball) while others do not (soccer).

 

It would be great if someone came up with a whole variety of statistical measures other than masterpoints (e.g., % of makeable contract made, number of "unforced errors") to supplement MPs. These would be very hard to keep track of in F2F bridge but in on-line play it might be possible to automate the statistics somehow. But until the (faraway) day when this is done everyone will be following their MP totals as well as other stats like regional of national or international wins, etc.

 

-Bob

[vuroth]

I completely understand the bad rep masterpoints get, but yeah, I do care about them.

 

I knew a local chess master who made bridge life master in about 2 years (less?). THAT, to me, is the kind of thing I'd like to be able to say about myself someday, even with the caveat that "life master" is not necessarily an indication of actual skill.

 

I suppose the other thing that appeals is getting my life master before I'm a certain age - say 40 or 45. Once I'm on the other side of it, maybe it won't matter to me as much as I think it will.

 

/shrug

 

Ultimately, my long term goal is to become a very good player. If I'm not pulling in the big master points in tourmanents, then chances are I'm not there yet.

 

V

[pclayton]

Unfortunately, bridge is different than almost any other game/sport. If you are an expert bowler, chess player, baseball player, tennis player, sudoku player, or whatever, and you walk into a game with strangers, it will not take long for them to recognize your abilities. Not so with bridge.

I cannot disagree more strongly. If I am paying attention, I can give you a good sense of a players ability in one hand. Sometimes it takes two. If you can't recognize good from bad, then you aren't that good yourself.

 

A top expert could play at a local game for weeks and except for a pattern of success (which may not even occur), no one would recognize his expertise.

 

Well, a run-of-the-mill club player isn't that good, so they can confuse charlatans with good players.

[Mosene]

I do not have the time to play much - so I would prefer a system that ranks based on where you place when you play (and who you play against). And my guess is that the masterpoint system blocks any attempts to develop such a system.

[Guest movingon]

My goal is to achieve gold life master and I hope to do so within a year or two. So, yes, i care about masterpoints. After I reach the goal, I may decide to go for 5000, who knows. I do know, that as I read bridge forums and play more and more bridge in more and more Flight A events against more and more very fine players (and many of them are here on BBO ACBL games) I AM improving my game, and that is very satisfying.

 

Now, when I finally make gold life master, I think i would like to put that on my profile... at least for awhile, anyway.. :(

[han]

I think masterpoints are fun. However, it bothers me that the brackets of knockout tournaments are based on them as they are sillly as a rating system.

[pigpenz]

I don't think it is very nice to belittle other people's proudest bridge (or non-bridge) accomplishments.

 

Maybe becoming a Bronze Life Master or earning a bunch of Blue Ribbon qualifications are not meaningful accomplishments for some of the best players among the regular Forums contributors, but there are many ACBL members for whom such things represent the culmination of many years of hard work. I don't see anything wrong with people being sufficiently proud of their greatest bridge achievements that they want to let other BBO members know. And it is not just players in the Bronze Life Master class who do this - some stars include statements like "multiple NABC championships" in their profiles.

 

Considering that the average ACBL member has something like 50 masterpoints, perhaps becoming a Bronze Life Master or earning a dozen Blue Ribbons qualifications is more significant than some of you think.

 

But even if you disagree with this, reading these posts leaves a really bad taste in my mouth - to me they sound like examples of "making myself feel big by making others feel small". I am sure this was not the intention of the posters in question, but how do you think you would feel if you had spent your bridge lifetime in pursuit of a goal only to hear players you admire proclaim that your achievement has no meaning?

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

one of the greatst things about Bridge was that you used to be able to compete against World Champions on a daily basis. But, sorrily this has gone by the wayside since the advent of bracketed KO's and lack of matchpoint events. sure you may still be able to get into a "A"matchpoint event but not on a daily basis like before....where else could you do this....imagine going to the golf course and playing against Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods.

[y66]

I don't care about masterpoints. Thought it was pretty cool though to see Migry Zur Campanile win the Fishbein Trophy for most masterpoints at the summer nationals and also to see her playing with Chris Willenken.

 

I've got 90 or so masterpoints. I have a good friend with quite a few more. I like to tease her when we're discussing a tough problem that *I'm sure* she'll be able to solve because she has *so many* masterpoints. She smiles every time, knowing she's about to be had. So, they're good for that. :)

[awm]

If I am paying attention, I can give you a good sense of a players ability in one hand. Sometimes it takes two. If you can't recognize good from bad, then you aren't that good yourself.

I strongly disagree with this statement.

 

Try approaching some of the top players in your area and ask them a question like "who are the ten best players in the district?" or even more difficult "who are the ten best players under 5000 masterpoints in the district?"

 

You will get radically different answers. And this is from very good, very experienced players who have presumably played a lot more than one or two hands against these folks.

 

Judging someone's skill based on "one hand, maybe two" is a big part of the reason for this. Anyone can play one hand brilliantly or terribly. This is especially true on bridgebase where people are often tired or distracted when they play. And it also pays to keep in mind that some players (especially young players) improve a lot in a short time -- just because someone seemed "pretty bad" when you played a couple boards against them three years ago doesn't mean they're "pretty bad" now (but many would assume so).

[pclayton]

If I am paying attention, I can give you a good sense of a players ability in one hand. Sometimes it takes two. If you can't recognize good from bad, then you aren't that good yourself.

I strongly disagree with this statement.

 

Try approaching some of the top players in your area and ask them a question like "who are the ten best players in the district?" or even more difficult "who are the ten best players under 5000 masterpoints in the district?"

 

You will get radically different answers. And this is from very good, very experienced players who have presumably played a lot more than one or two hands against these folks.

 

Judging someone's skill based on "one hand, maybe two" is a big part of the reason for this. Anyone can play one hand brilliantly or terribly. This is especially true on bridgebase where people are often tired or distracted when they play. And it also pays to keep in mind that some players (especially young players) improve a lot in a short time -- just because someone seemed "pretty bad" when you played a couple boards against them three years ago doesn't mean they're "pretty bad" now (but many would assume so).

Adam:

 

I never claimed I could zero in with this kind of accuracy after a couple of hands. I simply said I could determine if they were good or not. Everyone gets distracted (especially me), but its still the exception, and not the rule.

 

Asking a number of players who the top 10 are in any category is a serious LOL. This is very subjective, and you rate to get some very diverse answers.

[Guest Jlall]

I agree with adam, it is very hard to tell someones skill level in 1 hand. I think it would be especially difficult to tell the difference between the 100th best player and the best player.

[jdonn]

You can probably tell their general skill level in one hand, depending how difficult it is, but nothing very specific or exact without watching for longer. If it's a very flat or boring hand you may learn nothing of course.

[NickRW]

I know of one person of authority in the EBU who made several statements along the line of "I'm a good player, I have the masterpoints to prove it!" which he used to belittle any argument I came up with against him.

I tried arguing with one such person - could have been the same one for all I know - complete waste of time.

 

I am not a member of the EBU so do not register masterpoints. Lately the EBU wants to make all of us members so they can register them automatically (and tax us for the privilege - yeah - thanks - not)

 

Nick

[NickRW]

I do not have the time to play much - so I would prefer a system that ranks based on where you place when you play (and who you play against).

 

That I can agree with.

 

If (and I think it is definitely a big if despite what is said) the EBU brings in a proper ranking system (as they say they will), then maybe their enforced membership scheme might actually have some worthwhile benefit

 

And my guess is that the masterpoint system blocks any attempts to develop such a system.

 

Quite possibly. It is said that masterpoints make money. 'Nuff said.

 

Nick

[NickRW]

Some people out there care about finishing 19th or 20th in a Green Point event (EBU land) if they win a couple of matches and therefore green points. No doubt there is something similar in ACBL land and other parts of the world.

 

Do you care?

 

Please discuss.

Green point events attract better players. They also attract players with more time and money to play in such events who may or may not be better players. Thus they are at least slightly valuable.

 

Nick

[mycroft]

I don't know what to say. I know that my "who will play with me" ranking is worth more to me than my mumble-hundred masterpoints. I know my BRQs mean more to me, because they mean good results in tough (for me) fields. I know I will never be a JDonn or JLall, but that's okay - they can't do my job, either. Yes, for me, making the second day of a big National event would mean something - mostly because I can only afford to go to one every couple of years. An acceptable - to me - measure of my skill would be "qualified for day 2 of the Blue Ribbons." - and I'm going to try for that. Probably won't make it, but there you go. Makes me what I am - maybe not a Flight A player, but I'm going to play in Flight A anyway.

 

But I'm good enough to know Great (for my area, anyway) - Good - Reasonable - Up-and-coming - Life Novice reasonably quickly. And I know that 1000 MPs doesn't put you anywhere on that scale, necessarily, nor does 50 (yeah, it's more likely, but it's not a sinecure). And I know the people who care more about 10.xx Gold than First in "X", or more about First in "X" than 5th in "A" are the people I don't care to play with.

 

I will never be World Class. I am lucky to have played with some, and against others. I am particularly fond of the - occasional - times I have beat them consistently and convincingly. That probably does make me a terrible player in JDonn's book; the bar is that high, and I'm OK with that. But a game where I can say the second sentence truthfully, even though I am who I am - that's a joy that keeps me warm at night.

[Finch]

I think you can tell if someone is reasonably good/competent/knows what they are doing in the space of a few boards if they are paying attention to the game. How many boards depends on the boards. That's not long enough to decide if they're one of the top 10 in the country or not, but enough to put them into the Beginner/Intermediate/Advanced or Expert category.

 

You don't always need actually to watch them play at all...

 

There are some things that if I see them on the convention card that I know that they aren't an expert partnership even before they play a card.

 

There are some things people say after a deal which tells you they aren't an expert. The most telling (and fairly common) is for declarer to say to dummy "how many points did you have?" after playing a hand. Another one is to be really upset/sound cross/apologise sincerely to partner after taking the percentage line and going off (e.g. taking a normal finesse and losing to a singleton king). Another is not claiming in an obvious claim position.

[matmat]

That probably does make me a terrible player in JDonn's book;

I think people might be misunderstanding what Josh means. (or perhaps I am).

I don't think he implies that you are a terrible player if you are proud of your blue ribbon quals, or second day of LMP or whatever. I think what he's saying is that the people who mention this in their profiles don't do it out of pride, but rather as something to impress others and establish an aura of superiority.

Again, that's just my interpretation, and I do kinda agree with it.