[1eyedjack]

I don't see the point of getting rid of the country. It is just a bit of harmless fun, and is popular with the members. A fair amount of work went into making the flags available. Killjoys.

[HighLow21]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-12, 14:08, said:

LOL, I see not much has changed here in my most recent absence. HighLow21 is still here and he is still spouting *****.

FWIW, I will reiterate a suggestion of mine: optionally display a rating based on matchpoint results from robodupe tournaments. BBO can earn some money thanks to people playing robodupe just to get rated, and if someone manages to consistently score 55%+ in robodupes you know they have some minimum level of competence.

Glad to have my arrogant, fool counterpart back. Funny that he doesn't even get the basic concept of statistical analysis but enjoys insulting mine.

[barmar]

I do consistently better in robot duplicates than I do in f2f club games, and far better than I do in flight A tournaments. They're fun, but I'm not sure how representative they are of the player's true expertise.

[HighLow21]

barmar, on 2014-April-17, 14:34, said:

I do consistently better in robot duplicates than I do in f2f club games, and far better than I do in flight A tournaments. They're fun, but I'm not sure how representative they are of the player's true expertise.

more than anything they're representative of one's knowledge of GIB

[winkle]

I'd guess that an average club game in our area (Draper, Newton) is about 3-4% harder than an ACBL robot tournament. A flight A regional pairs would be about 6-8% harder, but New England tends to crappy regional pairs so maybe it's a little worse.

[Bbradley62]

HighLow21, on 2014-April-17, 14:50, said:

more than anything they're representative of one's knowledge of GIB

I think this is not at all true, since you can see explanations of your partner's bid and preview explanations of your potential bids.

[mgoetze]

barmar, on 2014-April-17, 14:34, said:

I do consistently better in robot duplicates than I do in f2f club games, and far better than I do in flight A tournaments. They're fun, but I'm not sure how representative they are of the player's true expertise.

I never said it would be a perfect system, but I do think it would be much better than anything based on the results of human vs. human play, and thus worthy of consideration.

Do you know anyone who does better in Flight A tournaments than in Robodupes?

[barmar]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-17, 18:18, said:

I never said it would be a perfect system, but I do think it would be much better than anything based on the results of human vs. human play, and thus worthy of consideration.

Good point. It's a relatively objective statistic. Other statistics have variability that's often outside the player's control -- your results are very dependent on who you play with and against.

[Bbradley62]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-12, 14:08, said:

FWIW, I will reiterate a suggestion of mine: optionally display a rating based on matchpoint results from robodupe tournaments. BBO can earn some money thanks to people playing robodupe just to get rated, and if someone manages to consistently score 55%+ in robodupes you know they have some minimum level of competence.

I very much like this idea. But, in addition to possibly generating income, it might increase the already-too-high demand for free robot dupes. Also, if we're talking about ratings that would largely be used by MBC players to find minimally-competent "randoms" to play with/against, their threshold would be considerably lower than a 55% average. I'd expect 55% to equate to Advanced+ on the BBO skill-level scale; a "reasonable" intermediate MBC player would probably be anyone who averages at least 47% in robodupes.

[mgoetze]

Bbradley62, on 2014-April-18, 10:12, said:

I very much like this idea. But, in addition to possibly generating income, it might increase the already-too-high demand for free robot dupes. Also, if we're talking about ratings that would largely be used by MBC players to find minimally-competent "randoms" to play with/against, their threshold would be considerably lower than a 55% average. I'd expect 55% to equate to Advanced+ on the BBO skill-level scale; a "reasonable" intermediate MBC player would probably be anyone who averages at least 47% in robodupes.

Well, the supply side of free robodupes is pretty easy to regulate. Anyway, everyone could establish their own threshold. I would be happy enough to play with someone who can keep up 48%+ in robot rebate tournaments but normal robodupes? No thanks. But it's possible that I'm just looking for slightly stronger partners than you are.

To be fair, robodupe success can certainly be inflated by knowing GIB well or choosing good times to play. But neither of these will allow you to get above 50% if you don't also have a modicum of bridge skills, which is all I'm asking for, really.

[barmar]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-18, 17:04, said:

Well, the supply side of free robodupes is pretty easy to regulate. Anyway, everyone could establish their own threshold. I would be happy enough to play with someone who can keep up 48%+ in robot rebate tournaments but normal robodupes? No thanks. But it's possible that I'm just looking for slightly stronger partners than you are.

Isn't think likely to degenerate into the same lousy situation that OKB has with Lehmans? No one wants to play with people who have 45% Lehmans, and if we published robodupe stats, no one will play with the 45% players.

Publishing stats is great for the people who have good results, but it makes pariahs of the ones who don't.

[Bbradley62]

But MG suggests making participation in such a process optional, which presumably is different than on OKB.

[barmar]

Bbradley62, on 2014-April-19, 20:44, said:

But MG suggests making participation in such a process optional, which presumably is different than on OKB.

IIRC, it's optional on OKB. You can play at "competitive" or "non-competitive" tables, and the latter don't affect your Lehmans (I could be wrong, it's been many years since I played on OKB and they could have changed things). But the good players wouldn't play at the non-comp tables, and most of the comp tables required you to have good lehmans. So without good stats, you were stuck in the ghetto.

And the same thing would be likely here. If participation is optional, people will just assume the worst of the players who opt out.

[mgoetze]

barmar, on 2014-April-19, 21:46, said:

And the same thing would be likely here. If participation is optional, people will just assume the worst of the players who opt out.

The worst as in they aren't willing to spend money to play with robots?

At the very least, if you only have 45% in robodupes, it won't stop you from playing as many more robodupes as you like. And if you have a good rating in robodupes, playing with someone who doesn't isn't going to change that, because you wouldn't be playing a robodupe. So I'm sure it at least wouldn't have exactly the same effects as on OKB.

Would there be other problems? Honestly I can't say what effects any such thing might have because I really cannot imagine what goes on in the head of someone who insists on playing with self-rated "experts" only, and that seems to be a significant faction on BBO. I can only say that it would be an improvement for me personally, but regardless of any ratings I would still prefer to play with people I know rather than people I don't when possible.

[1eyedjack]

Why does not the existing community shun playing with those with low (or no) BBO MP rankings, if the theory discussed above is valid?

[olegru]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-20, 18:29, said:

At the very least, if you only have 45% in robodupes, it won't stop you from playing as many more robodupes as you like.

Are you sure about it?
If your average in robot games less than 40%, even GIB-partner could recall some other duties it needs to perform instead of playing with you.

[mycroft]

barmar, on 2014-April-19, 21:46, said:

IIRC, it's optional on OKB. You can play at "competitive" or "non-competitive" tables, and the latter don't affect your Lehmans (I could be wrong, it's been many years since I played on OKB and they could have changed things). But the good players wouldn't play at the non-comp tables, and most of the comp tables required you to have good lehmans. So without good stats, you were stuck in the ghetto.

And the same thing would be likely here. If participation is optional, people will just assume the worst of the players who opt out.

From my memory, many of the games required you to have lehmans in a very narrow band. It might have been 53+, but it might be 47-49, or 42-45. Of course, what happens is that with the Lehman structure, you're not going to move very far unless you've found the fish or the drunks, if you only play in those narrow ranges. Similarly, it's hard for a 54% player to sit at a table opposite 45%ers and know they need to have a 62% game to not go down - especially if they're playing with a friend at 50 (so they only need a 56%), or after dinner and drinks.

[glenn789]

Somewhat related question and no apologies if it has been answered before because it is not obvious and I couldn't find it....

What determines the Stratified awards in ACBL World's Robot games? I was recently playing in a large game, came in like 10th and got .09 MP's. I noticed a friend of mine, a pretty strong "A" player with similar amount of points (6000+/-), had a lower percentage score in same game, but got more points because he somehow got credit for placing in "B" and "C" flights whereas I got "A" only.

How does BBO know what Flight you belong in? Is it based on anything the player sets in their profile? Could I set myself to novice and rack up Flight "C" points even when I've finished below average in a flighted game? Could BBO find an ACBL player's ranking given their player number? Would ACBL provide this info?

Thanks for a complete answer if someone has it!

-GM

[mgoetze]

glenn789, on 2014-April-27, 09:33, said:

Somewhat related question and no apologies if it has been answered before because it is not obvious and I couldn't find it....

I think it's not nearly related enough and should have been a new thread. I also think it's pretty obvious that it's based on BBO Masterpoints.

Welcome to the forum, though!

[Bbradley62]

mgoetze, on 2014-April-27, 09:59, said:

glenn789, on 2014-April-27, 09:34, said:

What determines the Stratified awards in ACBL World's Robot games?

... it's pretty obvious that it's based on BBO Masterpoints.

I don't think it's at all obvious (or likely, for that matter) that strata in an ACBL game are determined by BBO Masterpoints.