New Rating System

[star_one]

Hello guys

I believe that BBO needs and deserves a new rating system. We have to admit it is inappropriate that every one has a full control on his level. Some players just change their levels just to fool some one convince him / her playing a tournament. We all think we are the best but we need a better evaluation system. A new rating system.

Point awards are a very attractive idea but still not fair, sometimes it just a prove you have a credit card and you play more.

Stars with respect to all wonderful players we have still not fair too. Some times it is just a prove that you were one day a strong player.

We need a real evaluation to performance. A flexible Rating system where your rating is a reflection to your real level and skill just RIGHTNOW. Even the world bridge federation itself needs it. we need to live the present not to live in the past. We need a rating system who tell us our strength just right now comparing to others just right now.

I suggest something similar to ELO rating in chess.

Come on just say how you think about it.

Finally I really want to thank all BBO family for such a wonderful gate to bridge.

Elvis

[mgoetze]

I think individual ratings do not make sense. Bridge is a partnership game.

[fred]

Some food for thought:

 

Yesterday a person with poor manners who thinks that BBO should have an automated rating system, spent several minutes spamming the lobby with chat messages (mostly in all capital letters) in order to make sure that everyone online knew how he felt about this.

 

I saw the tail end of his series of messages and sent out a chat myself that said something like:

 

"Lobby chat is not an appropriate method for discussing this issue. Please e-mail me (fred@bridgebase.com) or post to www.bridgebase.com/forums if you want to discuss rating systems".

 

This message did not immediately result in the end of the lobby spam, but as a result I received 8 e-mails on this subject. NONE of the people who e-mailed me were in favor of rating systems. Here is an example of one of the e-mails I received (one of the shorter and less emotional ones - I have left out the user ID and e-mail address of the person who sent in out of respect for his privacy):

 

***** beginning of e-mail *****

 

i am a long-time player on bbo..this is such a wonderful venue.. great warm friends made here.. the fastest way to ruin it .. in my opinion.. would be a rating system.. the rating system is what turned me away from okbridge and brought me here

 

***** end of e-mail *****

 

There have been other threads on this subject in Forums so I am not going to repeat all the same arguments again. If someone has the time and inclination to find these threads and post a link in this thread I would appreciate it.

 

Bottom line is that automated rating systems create "social problems" which, in my view and apparently in the view of a lot of our members, are more serious than the problems that automated rating systems supposedly solve.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[keylime]

Fred,

 

Ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto, and ditto. Oh, almost forgot, ditto.

[Free]

We've had several discussions about rating systems, and although a GOOD (which doesn't exist at this point btw) rating system might have that one little advantage (knowing how good that unknown person is), the many disadvantages it brings with it totally annihilate that little advantage.

 

I'm very happy the people working on BBO realize this as well!

[junyi_zhu]

Hello guys

I believe that BBO needs and deserves a new rating system. We have to admit it is inappropriate that every one has a full control on his level. Some players just change their levels just to fool some one convince him / her playing a tournament. We all think we are the best but we need a better evaluation system. A new rating system.

Point awards are a very attractive idea but still not fair, sometimes it just a prove you have a credit card and you play more.

Stars with respect to all wonderful players we have still not fair too. Some times it is just a prove that you were one day a strong player.

We need a real evaluation to performance. A flexible Rating system where your rating is a reflection to your real level and skill just RIGHTNOW. Even the world bridge federation itself needs it. we need to live the present not to live in the past. We need a rating system who tell us our strength just right now comparing to others just right now.

I suggest something similar to ELO rating in chess.

Come on just say how you think about it.

Finally I really want to thank all BBO family for such a wonderful gate to bridge.

Elvis

Well, to please all the people, I think a rating system is still applicable, but only the user himself can look at it. So the current self rating structure is still valid and you may know whether your bridge improves or not by looking at the nurating yourself. Also, I think an individual rating is probably a nonsense. Partnership rating is more reasonable than individual ones. Also, rated hands should be played only in tournaments I feel. Otherwise, you can choose your opps at lobby bridge to maintain your high rating. In a tournament, you can't choose your opps. So it changes basically nothing and just gives everybody an indication of their partnership strength and hurts nobody.

[spwdo]

no rating please, tournaments are often left when someone is not getting the results he/she desires, leaving the sub with a bad heritage, so the good(sub) gets a lower ranking when he helps out and the idiot(intenional disconnect) benefits.

 

No please, its very easy on bbo, play with someone once , find out who he is, how he plays, like it, play again, dont like it, give a comment to him/her in his/her profile(right clicking name, there s room for comments) saying how much he/she .... at bridge and leave it with that, dont play again, easy, no fuzz, no prob

 

 

 

Marc

[Deanrover]

This issue has been discussed about 100 times.

 

I'd quite like it, as from a purely selfish point of view, it would drive me to improve my game. However, others could have even bigger egos and thus turn to cheating. It would be nice to find a solution that satisfies both sides of the debate. Some sort of optional rating system. Not sure of the top of my head what it could be, and it might be that no good compromise exists, but it is worth trying to find one IMHO.

[Deanrover]

no rating please, tournaments are often left when someone is not getting the results he/she desires, leaving the sub with a bad heritage, so the good(sub) gets a lower ranking when he helps out and the idiot(intenional disconnect) benefits.

 

No please, its very easy on bbo, play with someone once , find out who he is, how he plays, like it, play again, dont like it, give a comment to him/her in his/her profile(right clicking name, there s room for comments) saying how much he/she .... at bridge and leave it with that, dont play again, easy, no fuzz, no prob

 

 

 

Marc

Food for thought. How about a different kind of rating - a "BBO member rating (BMR)". This could factor in tournament completion ratio, leaving in the middle of a hand whilst not dummy ratio, how often the user changes the table etc. Perhaps BBO users could leave feedback on other users, so if you have a bad table manner it will be reflected in your BMR. FWIW I think this would be far more valuable than a skills based rating.

[spwdo]

i like the tournament completion ratio, leaving hand in middle of game ratio, changing tables ratio, not the feedback, all it takes is one individual not liking you to influence someones BMR or we have to make sure one user can only vote one time on someone, i mean is when someone doesnt like you and he has 180 nicks he can rather destroy your BMR in wich turn you have to create 200 nicks and undo that or let a friend do it for you:)

 

 

 

Marc

[the saint]

Bridge in general needs a better personal rating system. BBO certainly does not. If we accept (as we should) that people won't get their own ratings right all the time for whatever reason, but that as an approximate guide it works reasonably well, then there is no problem. I personally never cared too much about my rating during the brief time I was on OKB - my bridge battles lay elsewhere, but it destroyed so many games when people would disconnect at the merest whiff of a bad board. The way BBO is set up, there is always the (very) odd bad egg who will be selfish and ruin things for others, but the overwhelming proportion of people on here are cool, so lets not get stressed about it and just enjoy ourselves!!

 

Alan

[Rain]

There are ways to gauge your own (or anyone's) ratings for those who "die die have to know", as we say in Singapore.

 

1. myhands. Track anyone's data there if you like. Easy with excel. I'd just average scores up, but for the stastically gifted, maybe you'll come up with a great rating system that can be named after you, like the lehmans.

 

 

 

Rain

[hotShot]

I would be interested in seeing my own rating. A working rating system, that shows how you improve.

 

Unfortunatelly there is no such system.

 

Most people want a rating system, to select the best available player as partner or opponent. But don't we all know that a bunch of good players are not a good team? The fact that a player is very good, does not mean that he will form a very good pair with someone. There are so many little things where you can have different style or a different attitude.

I have seen true World Class players, performing poorly together because of incompatible styles.

This is why strong players don't change their partners to often.

[helene_t]

I agree 200% with the email that Fred received. I used to play at a site where I could chat in Dutch and it also has a very nice user interface. You could choose between rating and non-rating tables. The atmosfere on the rating tables was completely destroyed after the rating system was "improved" so that not everybody automatically got the hightest level. The Forum, too, was destroyed by a large number of flame-threads about alledged cheaters, and endless discussions about how to improve the rating system. The social problems caused by the rating system were well aknowledged, but few people realised that the problem was the idea of rating itself and not a flaw in the particular rating system opted for by that site. Several miracoulous alternative rating systems were suggested in the hope that they would solve the problems. Unfortunately, very few people opted for the non-rating tables, which is why I left that site.

 

After having played a doezen of indy's I have a reasonably realistic view on my level relative to that of other BBO'ers (slightly below average). I could collect statistics on my own performance if I really cared. Also, I don't care so much about the playing and judgement skills of potential partners. There are a lot of experts that don't know the bidding systems that I play and a lot of intermediates who do. Of course, there is some correlation between skills and system knowledge, but I'm not convinced that a rating system would be more accurate than simply asking people about their style, prefered signal methods, conventions and bidding system.

[slothy]

I would be interested in seeing my own rating. A working rating system, that shows how you improve.

 

Unfortunatelly there is no such system.

 

1) Most people want a rating system, to select the best available player as partner or opponent.

 

2) But don't we all know that a bunch of good players are not a good team? The fact that a player is very good, does not mean that he will form a very good pair with someone. There are so many little things where you can have different style or a different attitude. I have seen true World Class players, performing poorly together because of incompatible styles.

 

3) This is why strong players don't change their partners to often.

 

1) with no disrepect, hotshot, you havent been reading the forums it seems!! There is a groundswell of people on this forum at least who DONT want a rating system and they swamp those that do!

 

2) You just shot yourself in the foot :lol: Nothing AT ALL to do with ratings, but style....these people will not perform well together whether a rating system was in place or not

 

3) ??? Dont understand!!! Players (most of us), strong or otherwise, DONT change their partners OFTEN because they are comfortable with each other and enjoy each others game. If it aint broke dont fix it....

 

NOTHING TO DO WITH RATINGS!!

 

it is only those who see their partners as a potential handicap and where the result rather than the game is important. With them, to extend the metphor in red, if a wheel comes off once in a while they perceive the car as worthless. They, most of the time, are shooting %ages and perceive themselves as better and they naively believe that finding a better partner than the one they dumped will make them better too and that getting a higher rating will make them more attractive to others. Alas, they are oblivious to the fact that some people know their history and would rather share a cell with Hannibal Lector than a bridge table with them...

 

 

Forging a reputation is NEVER more important than forging a partnership. On an individual level, the latter gives birth to the former.

 

Believe me i am an obstretrician. :rolleyes: (in fact i started this profession very young and even gave birth to myself)

 

Alex

[the hog]

Alex, I should not ask this I know, but I can't resist. Did you conceive yourself as well.

[helene_t]

Here are te links to the old threads:

 

Discussion

Poll

[slothy]

Alex, I should not ask this I know, but I can't resist. Did you conceive yourself as well.

A good philosophical 'concept'...

 

If you are asking whether i am my own father...the answer is NO...would have been easier, believe me, in my teenage years when i needed paternal consent to go out with my girlfriend (ok she was a NUN twice my age but that is another issue)

 

if you are asking whether i somehow slept with my mother (i just asked her and she confirmed that i never did) ..the answer is NO....i certainly aint entering a hole i came out of....

 

Yours Faithlessly,

 

Oedipus

 

I hope that answers your rather personal, i have to say, inquiry, Ron.

[Aberlour10]

After some experiences on the other playing sites, my comment is short:

Please don't open the Pandora Box....

[slothy]

[edited: uday]

[luke warm]

[edited: uday]

hahahahah... probably some reference to a swan and leda and then helen and then, eventually, brad pitt and something obscene about him and angelina (with jennifer in there somewhere)

[hotShot]

Dear Alex!

 

I don't think what i said is asking BBO to invent and implement a rating system.

 

1) with no disrepect, hotshot, you havent been reading the forums it seems!! There is a groundswell of people on this forum at least who DONT want a rating system and they swamp those that do!

 

So I will help you to understand my posting a litte better.

 

I would be interested in seeing my own rating. A working rating system, that shows how you improve.

 

Unfortunatelly there is no such system.

 

This is a personal statement, saying that I am interested in a working rating system and why I think it is interesting. I further stated that a working system does not exist.

 

My interests are my own, and I state them any way I like.

 

Most people want a rating system, to select the best available player as partner or opponent. But don't we all know that a bunch of good players are not a good team? The fact that a player is very good, does not mean that he will form a very good pair with someone. There are so many little things where you can have different style or a different attitude.

 

Here I state that a rating system won't help much to form a good pair. Since this is the main reason people ask for one, stating that it will not work is directly related to rating systems.

 

I have seen true World Class players, performing poorly together because of incompatible styles.

This is why strong players don't change their partners to often.

 

Here I state that players stick to partners that have proved to be compatible.

 

In fact I read every post here, that is related to a rating system. And by doing so I discovered that most of the "social effects" are consequences of flawed rating systems.

 

A rating system that improves your rating if you win against weak players, is a flawed system.

A rating system that ruins you rating if you play with a novice, is a flawed system.

 

But the most importent thing I learned from reading those threads is that

people don't want a working rating system, they want a system that proves they are good players and that helps them to form a winning pair.

Both of this goals cannot be reached with a true rating system.

 

So I will keep my interest for a true rating system, and I have accepted that until there is an accepted working true rating system, it should not be intruduced to BBO.

 

Sadly your posting is not up to your usual forum rating :P

 

hotShot

[hrothgar]

In fact I read every post here, that is related to a rating system. And by doing so I discovered that most of the "social effects" are consequences of flawed rating systems.

 

A rating system that improves your rating if you win against weak players, is a flawed system.

A rating system that ruins you rating if you play with a novice, is a flawed system.

What is the nature of "reality"? In particular, is reality perceptive or objective?

 

Lets assume for the moment that it was possible to create a "perfect" rating system that conforms to your requirements? [For what its worth, I think that it is possible to do so]

 

Regardless of the technical characteristics of the rating algorithm, people's behaviour will be determined by their beliefs about how the ratings algorithm works.... In a perfect world, perception would match objective reality. However, the world is far from perfect.

 

Its for this reason that I argue that any ratings system needs to be both accurate and transparent. Unfortunately, I don't think that these two goals can be achieved simultaneously.

[hotShot]

Its for this reason that I argue that any ratings system needs to be both accurate and transparent. Unfortunately, I don't think that these two goals can be achieved simultaneously.

Well i don't know if every chess player can tell you how his ELO number is calculated, but it is accepted, because it works. The player with the better number is more likely to win, the bigger the difference is.

 

I think the "real" question is, can those selfrated "Experts" deal with a rating system that rates them as "Non-Experts".

[vanilla]

why is every expert so wild about getting a rating system ? surely you should all be able to judge who you want to play with and who not

here we have a free bridge site where we can all go search for friends and partners, play and enjoy....and still so many choose to complain

if you want a rating system, why not go somewhere else...can only mention OK, e-bridge and swan....but guess better stay on the free site and wimper !!!!

 

think stars and true experts have an obligation to make this game of ours known to as many people as possible. think they should all be ambassadors of bridge, make their contribution to make this game of ours known to people who have not yet found out how fun it is.....after all - could we have all events where stars meet and compete if a large majority of ordinary players were not paying to their national bridge assosiations.....

stars and experts should inspire us ordinary players, represent their countries in big tournaments, inspire us and urge us to study the game and get better.

new approaches should be published and discussed and club members invited to test and try...be active and work against the ACBL approach that everything new is to be feared and forbidden....

 

so be happy that Fred and his friends made this site for us, go find friends who are out there waiting for you and work actively to make bridge a game for us all