joining a casual table

[dnassif]

as a beginner in an unbelievably nuanced game, joining a table with better players can be rewarding but also very humiliating. most sitting players do not bother to check the skill-level of their 'new' partner. as a result, they expect bids and play to be at least at their level. some become quite upset and attack when this does not happen, resulting in one angry partner, one humiliated beginner, and two uncomfortable opponents.

what would be the harm in adding skill-level to our user name as soon as you enter a table? the table (and my partner) would then know what to expect and bid and play accordingly. yes?

[wzd3]

Great idea. The other item to add would be bidding system. You have to check profiles during a game, and if there was some way to say join a SAYC game, or other common system, the some conflicts could be avoided.

 

Also skill level can be misleading. Many of the players here do not bid/play like many of the ACBL partners I play with, which also causes conflicts. I'm not sure how to address all of it, but more options like skill level, bidding system, etc. might help.

[Stefan_O]

Great idea. The other item to add would be bidding system. You have to check profiles during a game, and if there was some way to say join a SAYC game, or other common system, the some conflicts could be avoided.

 

Also skill level can be misleading. Many of the players here do not bid/play like many of the ACBL partners I play with, which also causes conflicts. I'm not sure how to address all of it, but more options like skill level, bidding system, etc. might help.

 

Yes, skill-levels or ratings, over all, should be determined by the software based on previous RESULTS, not dreamed up by each player him/her self -- it's currently quite useless.

Some people apparently vastly over-rate their own abilities when they put "Expert/Advanced",

while I also see quite commonly players with 5000+ logins or so, being "Beginner/Novice".

[helene_t]

Dear Dnassif, welcome to the forum!

 

Skill levels are not very informative. First, they tend not to reflect real skill levels. Second, even when they are correct it may still be more important to know about a potential partner's social skills, prefered system and which languages he speaks rather than knowing his skill level.

 

The best you can do is:

- play with people whom you already know from real life bridge

- play with people you have played against and whose styles and manners you like

- volunteer as a substitute in team games and tourneys. People are mostly friendly towards substitutes so that is a good way to make friends

- participate in the forum discussions and mark forum regulars, whose comments you like, as friends on bbo.

[notproven]

Welcome to the forum.

 

First, you have to develop a thick skin: some players have limited social skills and you can't do much about that, but many more have limited language skills. Many lack the ability to delicately phrase their comments, so that statements intended as constructive come out harsh. Always check the players country, then judge if language might be a barrier.

 

Another help might be to go to the BIL program, which is intended specifically for advancing players like yourself. They try to improve your game in a friendly atmosphere and help you meet other players who are working on their game. BIL runs teaching programs, play and tournaments.

 

In social games it might help to "introduce" yourself before you bid, by stating your system (standard american, SAYC, etc.) so partner has some idea.

 

The important part is to keep your cool, even under trying circumstances. It gets better.:)

[msjennifer]

The idea of displaying skill level,although good in principle,is not quite correct.There are some players who call themselves experts yet do not have understanding of the basic system.One opponent who labels himself as 'world class' and playing with an'expert' partner could not even visualize a contract of 6 Spades which was cold albeit in a Moysian 4-3 fit and played in 3 NT only to lose first five tricks to opponents and went one off.There are some others ,who I know personally, calling themselves experts yet who are nothing better than intermediates.To solve this issue I suggest that they mention the real percentage of marks or number of IMP scored by them on average of last three months.These figures are easily verifiable from the site itself to anybody.Some of the so-called self experts have an average of plus or minus around 50%.Those who have a consistent average of more than 60% dare consider themselves as experts or World Class or else they will only be world class with 'cl' silent.

[nekthen]

Rating Systems are fraught with danger. If the site calculates your ability and you care, you might stop playing with lowly people even in casual games if you thought it would affect your ranking. An expert who kindly chooses to play with beginners (or gets paid for it) may well have a poor ranking

[GrahamJson]

I believe that BBOSkill, which is no longer working, allowed for the relative skills of both partners and oppo when calculating skill levels. I don't know how effective it was but it should certainly be possible to have a system that foes this.

 

On another matter, my personal grouch is over players who play double dummy (I.e. kibitzing themselves when they are playing). I have reported three players to BBO who are obviously doing this. One seems to have disappeared, perhaps banned, but two continue to play. (although one I only reported very recently). Can others please report offenders, they are not difficult to spot, to ensure BBO is clean.

[Caitlynne]

Certainly knowing a reasonably accurate skill level helps, but one of the problems with the way BBO does things is having players self-rate their skill levels. Few people have a sufficiently objective perspective on this.

 

In general, unless there is discussion, one should assume SAYC. Those who assume otherwise are responsible for any confusion.

 

However, I would also suggest that those who do not know SAYC and ALL its gadgets (which are fairly few in number) bear some responsibility here. They should NEVER just sit down and start playing without informing their partner that they do NOT play conventions that are part of SAYC (e.g., Jacoby transfers in response to NT).

[cynac]

Is the last post - that SAYC be assumed - an official line? I had always assumed that partner looks at my profile to see what my bids mean, and I look at his. Neither of us assumes that the other will adopt his/her system. Have I been wrong? Must I play SAYC ( which I do not know). I always announce my "weak no trump" though this not always noted. Others may not understand/look at "chat" as well as not looking at profile.

[notproven]

With regard to an "official system": I was told that SAYC is the default, but there is no official system. However, I can't find any mention of that in the "Help" section. I know that the robots play GIB (badly) and that some free tournaments require that you play 2/1. That's why it's best to announce the system that you wish to play when you sit down with a new partner. It also helps a lot to review the basic convention cards (click on "My BBO") to see how closely your idea of a system matches the BBO suggestions.

[helene_t]

Is the last post - that SAYC be assumed - an official line? I had always assumed that partner looks at my profile to see what my bids mean, and I look at his. Neither of us assumes that the other will adopt his/her system. Have I been wrong? Must I play SAYC ( which I do not know). I always announce my "weak no trump" though this not always noted. Others may not understand/look at "chat" as well as not looking at profile.

There is no official system. You can play whatever you want.

 

That you and partner both look at each other's profile and assume you are both playing your own system sounds like a very bad idea. Suppose West plays SAYC while East plays Acol, and it goes:

 

1♠-2♣

2♠

 

Since East plays Acol, 2♣ promises only 9 points, but since West plays SAYC, 2♠ is forcing. So you could easily end up too high.

 

You need to agree which system you play.

[johnu]

Certainly knowing a reasonably accurate skill level helps, but one of the problems with the way BBO does things is having players self-rate their skill levels. Few people have a sufficiently objective perspective on this.

 

Some people self-rate as expert or world class because they are delusional. Others self-rate at much higher levels because a lot of people don't want to play with beginners or intermediates. Of course, it only takes a few hands (sometimes only 1) for the actual skill level to start to be revealed.

[dr4sight]

Great idea. The other item to add would be bidding system. You have to check profiles during a game, and if there was some way to say join a SAYC game, or other common system, the some conflicts could be avoided.

 

Also skill level can be misleading. Many of the players here do not bid/play like many of the ACBL partners I play with, which also causes conflicts. I'm not sure how to address all of it, but more options like skill level, bidding system, etc. might help.

 

 

I agree with this.

 

I strongly prefer to play with people who play SAYC in a way similar to what I do (and also prefer to play with people who rate themselves intermediate or advanced). Anything that can be done to quickly and smoothly make it easier to find compatible partners would be most appreciated.

 

And since most of us do not want to join a table that still needs one or two more players to get started it would be nice if the table view columns were sortable or have filters where one option is to just show tables that already have three players.

[pescetom]

There is no official system. You can play whatever you want.

That's not completely true I would say. While I agree that there is (fortunately) no longer a consensus to play obsolete SAYC, BBO does nominally oblige you to play its peculiar version of 2/1 in Free TCR tournaments and you can't get far unless you play it religiously at all times with robots.

 

That you and partner both look at each other's profile and assume you are both playing your own system sounds like a very bad idea.

....

You need to agree which system you play.

Fully agreed. The rub is that BBO offers no obvious way to do this. The profile is not even supposed to serve this purpose and there is no mechanism to say "ok, I'll play yours (except A, B, C....) and you forget mine". In an automated tournament you can't even chat.

Surely one should at least be able to define capability to play one or more standard systems and either partner should be able to select one and obtain agreement. This is neither rocket science nor a hindrance to automation of tournaments.

[Georooney]

what would be the harm in adding skill-level to our user name as soon as you enter a table? the table (and my partner) would then know what to expect and bid and play accordingly. yes?

 

I usually look at my partner's profile as soon as practical. If he/she chooses to rate their abilities, great. If not, they probably would not have added that info to their user name either.