Skill level as part of table options

[julie5607]

Currently it seems to me that one of the biggest difficulties in the main bridge club, for newer players especially, is finding a table that plays at their comfort level. BBO already has the ability to sort tables by "skill level", but that sort is done by the self-professed levels of all the players at the table. So if, for example, an intermediate player is looking for an intermediate table to play at, and sorts by intermediate, a table with two intermediate players and one self-proclaimed "world class" player, or indeed a player in any other category, won't show up in the mix.

 

What I would like to see would be a split of the optional "Description of table" field, with a section where the host can also check off one or more levels of play, using the same fields that people use for their own level description. For example, a host could check off novice and beginner, or intermediate, or expert and world class - so that the level the host INTENDS to play at is sortable, not the claimed level of players at the table. I think this would make the "level" sort much more rational for all players, and give the host more control in attracting the type of players she is most interested in playing with.

 

Julie

[sceptic]

This won't work until people stop lying about their skill level

[julie5607]

Actually Wayne it would help with that problem, by allowing a host, who truly is interested in attracting similar level players to the table, to accept, for example, a friend as a pard who has a self-professed skill level that is not the same as the table level, when the host knows full well that friend is the correct level for the table - without now skewing the table level to include the friend's "suspect" self-assessment.

 

The only real issue I can see with this is in the case of bunny bashing high-level players who will set about attracting novices and beginners in order to feed some ego driven imp collection drive - but they can operate easily enough in the current environment as well, and are a case for abuse@ if they take their game too far.

 

Julie

[extrasolid]

I think it is a good idea, at least as far as you can avoid the skilllevel "private" and if you can set "name" as "not private" as far as you can avoid "private" "private" "expert". I always use a table description where it is said, that i wont accept these players, but nobody seems to read them.

 

I would like to have the option to describe my wanted P or Op very much!

 

Uli

[Double !]

I think it is a good idea, at least as far as you can avoid the skilllevel "private" and if you can set "name" as "not private" as far as you can avoid "private" "private" "expert". I always use a table description where it is said, that i wont accept these players, but nobody seems to read them.

 

I would like to have the option to describe my wanted P or Op very much!

 

Uli

Maybe it would be helpful to eliminate "private" as one of the options for skill level?

 

Just a thought.

[Al_U_Card]

Or even the imp score avg. (or MP avg.) over the last 100 hands played? (or 500)

[1eyedjack]

Maybe it would be helpful to eliminate "private" as one of the options for skill level?

 

Just a thought.

I don't think that would help. If they display "private" it is because they do not want to display their skill level. Such players will be more inclined to lie about their skill level if forced to disclose it. At least the current practice of permitting "private" allows others the option to treat that as a separate skill level that they can choose to avoid.

 

I think that those who display "intermediate" are generally pretty honest, with those who declare "advanced" perhaps slightly overstating their abilities by site rules standards.

 

There may be a few good players who display "beginner" but I think that they are very rare. It does nothing for the ego, and gains you very little advantage in the play, and probably gravitates you to a table that has no enjoyment factor. Those who have developed the skill to be a good player simultaneously tend to develop the mindset to go beyond such things.

 

There are certainly a few players who display "world class" as a joke. (Funny??). I tend to ignore that categorisation unless I recognise the name or they have a star.

 

There does seem to be a problem with those who self-assess "expert". There seems to be a self-fulfilling prophesy at work at this level. So many mediocre players call themselves expert that if you are (say) "advanced" and honestly self-assess as such you not only are labelling yourself at an inappropriate level contrasted with the rest of the players (even if in accordance with site rules) but it could actively inhibit your chances of sitting at a table "experts only, please".

 

Any cure for that is likely to be worse than the disease, IMHO. Still I agree with the OP that filtering could be stronger on that field.

[Elianna]

.. but it could actively inhibit your chances of sitting at a table "experts only, please".

"experts only" = "people who play a game other than bridge"

 

"REAL experts only"="people who play a game other than bridge and like to lecture partner about it"

 

At least, from my experience. :P

[temp3600]

"ONLY STRONG REAL EXPRTS PLZ NO PRIVATE" = those are the real experts

[barmar]

I think that those who display "intermediate" are generally pretty honest, with those who declare "advanced" perhaps slightly overstating their abilities by site rules standards.

I confess that I've done this. I consider myself a good intermediate, and that's what I used to have in my profile. But after playing in a bunch of indies, and seeing the quality of play of other people calling themselves Advanced, I decided that I was at least that good. It doesn't matter what the official site rules say, these words attain their meaning from the way they're actually used in practice; if enough intermediate people decide to call themselves advanced, then that's what "advanced" means.

[42]

Caution: sarcasm!

Let's wait for a while and we either have real beginners or selfdeclared worldclassplayers on BBO. This increasing selfoverrating because others do, sucks... Let us make the world a littlebit better by remaining honest, at least with ourselves.

Greetings from Italy :)

Caren

[inquiry]

It use to be to become an EXPERT, it took years of practice, lots of reading, and playing, lots and lots of playing, againt top class opponents. And after long struggles, you finally begin to master small parts of the game. Now days, it has become a little easier.

 

Step 1... Log onto BBO

Step 2... Click your own name from the lobby

Step 3.... Find the option entitled "Your skill level"

Step 4.... Use pull down menu, select "EXPERT" or if you know what cross imps are, "World class"

 

Why spend time, heartache and lots of money to learn the game?

 

Ben... :-)

[Brandal]

If they display "private" it is because they do not want to display their skill level. Such players will be more inclined to lie about their skill level if forced to disclose it. At least the current practice of permitting "private" allows others the option to treat that as a separate skill level that they can choose to avoid.

I can't speak for "such players" but I actually used

"Private" for a long time because I found it difficult

to assess my skill level.

 

I kinda liked the idea about an average imp score

last 100 or 500 boards or whatever,from any imp

tournament to show on the profile.

 

Or something similar....

 

<_<

[sceptic]

Greetings from Italy 

hmmmm, I thought you were from China not Italy :P

[42]

I kinda liked the idea about an average imp score

last 100 or 500 boards or whatever, from any imp

tournament to show on the profile.

When playing teammatches with weak teammates it will ruin the statistics :blink:

 

hmmmm, I thought you were from China not Italy

Infact I am from Mars, they gave me some holidays to enjoy good food and turn my pale green skincolour into a dark forrest green ;)

[Brandal]

I kinda liked the idea about an average imp score

last 100 or 500 boards or whatever, from any imp

tournament to show on the profile.

When playing teammatches with weak teammates it will ruin the statistics :blink:

I was thinking tournaments,not team matches...

 

I guess any ratingsystem is flawed....but it will be quite

an effort to "cheat" if say 500 last boards count...

 

It won't have a huge impact in either direction if

you have a great or a bad tournament......

 

Having said that,I think self rating is best for the

community.

[mycroft]

Any sort of "last X" rating will do some things:

 

1) promote bailing. Sure, everyone can see the hands now, if they care to look. But they'll see that it was your partner who was insane. -1.5 IMPs could mean anything.

 

2) promote stratifying. I enjoy playing "over my head", and have done so, sometimes successfully. I enjoy my self-rating of "experts play with me", and I am good enough, and pleasant enough, that they do. Of course, I am not an expert, and I will frequently be -2IMPs/board against them. Does that mean I am a novice?

 

On Another Site, there has generated a very narrow stratifying with their rating "only players X -> X+3" (or 4). Never mind what that does to the calculations (of any rating scheme), look where it puts someone who has a couple of very good players as friends and frequently plays against them (or practices against them)...

 

3) What about partners practicing, playing with students (or friends who are hopeless, but good friends), or the Friday Night online Pub crawl? If the results are so important, that'll all go out the window.

 

Also, frankly, I play weird systems, and weird systems (even boring ones like Precision) do well against pickups, as they don't have experience with either partner or defending. While I don't enjoy that - I much prefer playing against a pair (I want to win because we and our system is better, not because we and our system are unfamiliar or the opponents are on different pages), and I am sure most pairs do - it does affect the rankings.

 

Lastly, you can game any rating system - and people do (look at the number of cheaters in "nothing" games). The only game I want to play on BBO is bridge, TYVM. Right now if someone is getting "extra help" in my games, it happens. I hope they enjoy the tainted IMPs. I've had fun, and we played well. If it annoys me enough, I find another game. If it's going to affect my "what games I can play in" rankings for 2 months, well, I'm going to get annoyed a lot faster, and possibly in situations where there is nothing going on.

 

Having said all that, I don't play pickup much if at all. So it probably isn't going to affect me whatever happens.

 

Michael.

[Al_U_Card]

Having said all that, I don't play pickup much if at all. So it probably isn't going to affect me whatever happens.

 

Michael.

Lucky you. I only play occasionally and almost always with pick-up pards. (Some good players, with whom I have played, when they arrive are willing to play with me but that only happens by chance as my game times are generally short and unscheduled.)

 

I look for 2/1 and expert or at least advanced level.

 

I do run in to a fair number of loonies but the duration is usually short. I would like it to be zero and I believe that an average imp stat would be a good guide.

[microcap]

Along these lines, how hard would it be to expand the skill level options at the advanced and up levels. For example, you frequently see people looking for expert+++ players, as the average BBO expert seems to be around intermediate in real life LOL

 

I like the self ranking system actually, and the market place of players is implementing its own solution to the issue. Bridge has a very steep early learning curve, followed by much finer distinctions at higher levels.

 

I know this has been beaten to death over the years--- :P B)

[precision0]

Skill level should be set by BBO server depending on how many free tournaments you win or lose.

 

The rest is pointless. If you leave a user specify his own level, most times he would lie.

[jillybean]

I think that those who display "intermediate" are generally pretty honest, with those who declare "advanced" perhaps slightly overstating their abilities by site rules standards.

I confess that I've done this. I consider myself a good intermediate, and that's what I used to have in my profile. But after playing in a bunch of indies, and seeing the quality of play of other people calling themselves Advanced, I decided that I was at least that good. It doesn't matter what the official site rules say, these words attain their meaning from the way they're actually used in practice; if enough intermediate people decide to call themselves advanced, then that's what "advanced" means.

Using this rationale we will all surely be rated as expert :P

[csdenmark]

Skill level should be set by BBO server depending on how many free tournaments you win or lose.

 

The rest is pointless. If you leave a user specify his own level, most times he would lie.

Really - I think I dont trust BBO server this quality.

 

Those kind of sport I know of using ratings of a similar kind have at least 2 dimensions.

 

1 for complexity

1 for performance

[matmat]

Skill level should be set by BBO server depending on how many free tournaments you win or lose.

 

The rest is pointless. If you leave a user specify his own level, most times he would lie.

of course everyone plays in free BBO tournaments all the time. I can't think of a single person that doesn't.

 

This whole concept of self-ranking is pointless, it probably should be eliminated altogether.

What *might* be useful is for a player to be able to "rank" their partner on a two-level scale:

 

"Yes, I would play with so-and-so again."

"No, I would not play with so-and-so again."

 

and then have the %age of partners that would play again listed on the profile.

 

another useful # would be the % of hands abandoned.

[precision0]

I 'd suggest this:

 

How many users exist on bbo ? X.

Let X/10 of them be experts , X/5 of them advanced, X/2 of them intermediate, and the rest unclassified.

 

Do you score X% in a tournament? Your score is adjusted and your level is increased or decreased depending on other users' level.

 

Also, ppl may choose to run tournaments that do not modify their rating in case they don't want to play for it.

[csdenmark]

Also, ppl may choose to run tournaments that do not modify their rating in case they don't want to play for it.

If you go to Swan bridge you will have an option to open rated tables. You will rarely find an option to join such a table because nobody want to risk their present score with unsolid pick-up partners. You will have problems to find find opps. for a similar reason. But please test the feature and report here.

 

PS.

- I never play tournaments - how about that?

- Do you really trust partners unable to spell their own name? You have a problem yourself in this Forum I see!

- Do you really trust partners with no knowledge of their own nationality?

 

Accept that what is displayed to you is a visit-card and nothing else. It invites you and on the conditions the persons offer you have the right to accept or reject the invitation. Simple as that I think.