barmar Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 I don't think language, location or common friends should be included in compatibility. One of the great things about BBO is playing with people from all over the world. In fact, I preferred finding a table based upon the contracts that people play and how they rate themselves.No one is forcing you to use compatibility to choose a table to play. If you want to play with diverse people, ignore the compatibility rating. But if you want to play with people you think you'll understand, the compatibility score may be helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 10, 2014 Report Share Posted September 10, 2014 Today I played a tournament (IMP pairs,using the web client). After the first round (three boards), the scores were posted (I don't remember if the tourney was clocked, I think not). I now clicked on "other tables" for one of the boards. When I clicked back on my own score card, I saw that the one board for which I had been looking at "other tables" now wasn't scored anymore, and the total IMPs for my partnership had been adjusted accordingly, as if that board had not been scored (similar to how it looks when the original score was Ave= and the director subsequently adjusts: the raw score was there but there was no IMP score for that board). I then tried inspecting "other tables" for one of the other three boards, and again with the result that the IMP for that board disappeared in the "my table" tab. I don't remember if the IMPs were vissible in the "other table" tab, nor do I remember if they came back in the "my table" later in the tourney, although the final result was correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diana_eva Posted September 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Today I played a tournament (IMP pairs,using the web client). After the first round (three boards), the scores were posted (I don't remember if the tourney was clocked, I think not). I now clicked on "other tables" for one of the boards. When I clicked back on my own score card, I saw that the one board for which I had been looking at "other tables" now wasn't scored anymore, and the total IMPs for my partnership had been adjusted accordingly, as if that board had not been scored (similar to how it looks when the original score was Ave= and the director subsequently adjusts: the raw score was there but there was no IMP score for that board). I then tried inspecting "other tables" for one of the other three boards, and again with the result that the IMP for that board disappeared in the "my table" tab. I don't remember if the IMPs were vissible in the "other table" tab, nor do I remember if they came back in the "my table" later in the tourney, although the final result was correct. That happens when the score is tied. Normally it should show -- but for some reason after clicking Other tables those dashes go away and the score remains blank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 But the score wasn't tied. One board was about 8 imps gain. The other was a loss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted September 13, 2014 Report Share Posted September 13, 2014 I agree with hrothgar, "some people won't complete it" is a poor reason not to have a questionnaire for the compatibility score - make it useful for the people who want to use it, not for those who don't care! What should the questionnaire look like though? "How would you bid this hand" would probably work well for the average BBO user but what about those of us who can and do play more than one bidding system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted September 14, 2014 Report Share Posted September 14, 2014 What should the questionnaire look like though? "How would you bid this hand" would probably work well for the average BBO user but what about those of us who can and do play more than one bidding system?This reminds me of the frequent suggestions to use a quiz to gauge skill level, rather than self-ratings. The idea always runs into the problem that bidding quizzes will be dependent on how well you know the system being used in the quiz, so it will be inherently biased. "The perfect is the enemy of the good" is an old saying that comes to mind. We're not trying to be the Match.com of bridge, it's just a little hint that may be helpful when looking for pickup pickup partners. It's likely to be more important that you can understand each other when discussing system than that you play exactly the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaceZyzy Posted June 7, 2015 Report Share Posted June 7, 2015 One could use a variety of AI learning techniques to have the compatibility system evolve over time. However, this may require more resources than BBO wants to invest. If they are interested in this approach, I have experience developing such systems and would be willing to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falka Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 It works very well. thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 carbon Posted May 20, 2019 Report Share Posted May 20, 2019 I agree completely with this. The current "compatibility" is really similarity & has nothing to do with bridge systems in common - which is what i consider "compatibility".Compatibility for me is composed of several unrelated factors: 0. Friendliness: There is no objective way to measure this, so I would stick to the Friend/Enemy lists. As this is already shown, there is no need to factor it into the compatibility. 1. Completion rate: This should be a factor, even though it is indicated separately. 2. Do we have a language in common? - This would require the possibility for each player to state the languages he is able to use for communication. 3. Knowledge of Bidding systems and conventions: There should be a list of well described bidding systems and conventions somewhere in BBO, and each player should be able to mark each system and convention with "unknown", "known", "used before", or "like". The relative amount of matches should be an important factor for compatibility. 4. Carding: Similar, but shorter list. 5. Declarer play: For each board played as declarer, and for each card played, determine if the player chose the optimal double dummy action or not. Use this to compute a % value "double dummy action chosen". The smaller the absolute value of the difference of this figure is for 2 players, the more compatible they are. I think this should be the most important factor. 6. Defending: same as declarer play, but it should be taken into account if the defenders shared common carding methods or not. It could even be implemented for each user to assign a weight to factors 1-6. Factors that should be not used for the compatibility are: Nationality, self-rating, masterpoints, ratio of number of friends/enemies, IP address (as this depends on where I happen to stay currently, or can even be totally meaningless when a satellite connection or a vpn-tunnel is used.) How often the par contract or better was reached should also not be taken into account, because this is to much dependent on partner and opps. Having available the %-Values for declarer play and defending might also help to identify cheaters. Karl 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.