[fred]

The next version of BBO (beta will be released by Monday) will contain a new version of FD with the following options for displaying dispositions, suit lengths, and possible outcomes:

1) display always
2) display never
3) display only when not set to the default value

Settings for each of dispositions, lengths, and outcomes are stored seperately. The default value of all 3 of these new settings will be 3 above.

Those of you who find these parts of the automated descriptions annoying and/or useless will thus be able to disable them.

I have had a lot of feedback about FD since our last official release. Almost all this feedback has been either very positive or very negative.

My conclusions so far is that FD is a good idea, but that it will not become useful for the average BBO member until we either make it easier for people to enter their own systems or offer more and better stock files.

Sorry I have not had much chance to improve the FD application during the past couple of months. This is unlikely to change soon.

Good news is that there is some new movement of the FD file creation front, both from volunteers and from some people who work for BBO.

Hopefully you will see some much improved stock FD files soon and hopefully this will help to make the application more popular.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

fred, on Mar 10 2006, 11:24 PM, said:

The next version of BBO (beta will be released by Monday) will contain a new version of FD with the following options for displaying dispositions, suit lengths, and possible outcomes:

1) display always
2) display never
3) display only when not set to the default value

Settings for each of dispositions, lengths, and outcomes are stored seperately. The default value of all 3 of these new settings will be 3 above.

Those of you who find these parts of the automated descriptions annoying and/or useless will thus be able to disable them.

I'm a bit confused - are these options set by the person who creates the file, or does each person that the file is displayed to get to choose which things they want to see?

[fred]

david_c, on Mar 10 2006, 11:08 PM, said:

fred, on Mar 10 2006, 11:24 PM, said:

The next version of BBO (beta will be released by Monday) will contain a new version of FD with the following options for displaying dispositions, suit lengths, and possible outcomes:

1) display always
2) display never
3) display only when not set to the default value

Settings for each of dispositions, lengths, and outcomes are stored seperately. The default value of all 3 of these new settings will be 3 above.

Those of you who find these parts of the automated descriptions annoying and/or useless will thus be able to disable them.

I'm a bit confused - are these options set by the person who creates the file, or does each person that the file is displayed to get to choose which things they want to see?

Each person sets his own 3 new options (and these are remember between BBO sessions in the file on your hard disk that stores user options).

Those options will apply when that person views any automatic explanation generated by FD.

So a person who hates dispositions can turn them off always.

A person who loves them can turn then on always.

A person who wants to see dispositions only if they have been set to something other than "no agreement" can arrange for that.

FD files will remain the same regardless. These options only determine how the automatic explanations generated by file will be displayed.

The settings that the file author chooses are not relevant to what other people who view his files will see.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

Oh. I was sort of hoping for the other answer

Isn't this just going to cause more problems? Like, you make a bid which you think FD has described as "Forcing to game", but you're not sure whether the opponents can see that?

[Sigi_BC84]

I think the default value (setting #3) is the best option for most people -- most will probably feel no need to change it. It should have been the default behaviour of FD to begin with, so basically introducing it can be seen as a bug fix.

If people change that option one should assume that they knew what they were doing (probably they are FD users themselves and are annoyed by bad FD files or whatever). If somebody gets damaged because he or she randomly changed options in the BBO client, well, bad luck for them I'd say.

In my eyes the worst case is assumed too often at the moment when FD features are being discussed. Somebody is confused by a certain aspect of FD and downright assumes that this will lead to major cases of misinformation and appeals. Let's be a bit more optimistic and actually assume some basic common sense and intelligence with BBO players.

The "possible outcomes" part of the explanation box should get a label, however. You can deduce what it must mean, but here one should in fact assume that many players will be confused -- especially since it's completely unusual to point out the potential strains at the current point of an auction. People probably don't expect this kind of information so it will be hard for them to understand that it's being presented to them at all. An explanatory label will make it clearer.

--Sigi

[fred]

david_c, on Mar 10 2006, 11:32 PM, said:

Oh. I was sort of hoping for the other answer

Isn't this just going to cause more problems? Like, you make a bid which you think FD has described as "Forcing to game", but you're not sure whether the opponents can see that?

That is not your problem.

This is analogous to properly filling out your convention card and the opponents not bothering to look at the information you provided.

Or it is analogous to properly alerting a bid and the opponents not bothering to ask for the meaning.

If they make a poor bridge decision as a result, that is their problem.

If you are an FD file author and don't want people to see outcomes (for example) just leave outcomes alone when you make your file. Since the default setting is "show outcomes only if they are set to non-default setting", the only people who will see anything for outcomes are those who love outcomes so much that they want to see them all the time (they will use the "always" setting to accomplish this).

On the other hand, if you are an FD file author and if you want to use outcomes in your files, most people will see will see them. The only ones who don't will be those who use the "never" for the new outcomes setting. Could they miss some important information as a result? Sure, but that is their problem. They have intentionally blocked the information you are trying to provide them.

I am pretty sure the method I described for handling this is best for both FD file authors and for people who view the files they create.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[david_c]

Apologies if any of my posts seem a bit negative, I really do think that FD is great, but at the same time there are a few things which would make it so much better.

It's good to be able to stop displaying the "No agreement" disposition. It means that when there's no disposition which fits, I can select "No agreement" and it will be much clearer to the reader. But this really needs to be controlled by the writer of the file, not the reader. Otherwise, if the reader selects "display always" then they will be told "No agreement" even when that isn't true. This problem could be easily solved by creating a new disposition called something like "Do not display" (or, if you like, an empty string). Possibly this could replace "No agreement" as the default. Any chance, Fred?

For suit lengths, there is a further complication in that the default ("Any #") is often quite useful information. I'd really love to be able to define some bids as "Any #" and others as "Do not display suit length". But I realise that this would be a relatively large change to the program.

[fred]

david_c, on Mar 11 2006, 12:18 AM, said:

It's good to be able to stop displaying the "No agreement" disposition. It means that when there's no disposition which fits, I can select "No agreement" and it will be much clearer to the reader. But this really needs to be controlled by the writer of the file, not the reader. Otherwise, if the reader selects "display always" then they will be told "No agreement" even when that isn't true. This problem could be easily solved by creating a new disposition called something like "Do not display" (or, if you like, an empty string). Possibly this could replace "No agreement" as the default. Any chance, Fred?

Some chance. I will think about it.

However, I would prefer to at least release a beta with the new options and see what people think once they have had a chance to try it. I hear what you are saying, but I think in practice the current approach will almost always be effective. I could certainly change my mind after thinking about this some more and after getting some feedback from people who try the next version.

I am going to Taiwan on Monday which will be the beginning of 4 weeks of almost non-stop bridge for me. Whatever time I have for work will likely be spent on replying to e-mail and fixing bugs.

So, once I release the final beta before I leave, it is unlikely that you will see any major changes to either FD or the BBO client during the next month.

No need to apologize - it is obvious from your posts that you are trying to be constructive and that you have given a lot of thought to FD. If you want to know what "negative" is like, I could post some of the FD-related e-mails I have received (just kidding).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com