[inquiry]

Currently the BBO offers TEAM GAMES in the team game room. Once, BBO Poland sponsored league play with several different levels of skills (beginner teams, up to world class teams). If memory serves me correct, one of our better BIL instructors won the team event, but no matter.

Richard said in another thread that he PREFERS team games (to another type of event). I wonder, how many people prefer to play in team games over normal tournment play? Over main room play? If you prefer team games, what format do you like?

For me, I LOVE team games. They are my favorite (especially on line).. here you need no "field protection", as your team mates, in theory, provide you with automatic protection. I prefer them to main room, I prefer them to tournaments. I would pay good hard earned money to play in them. I got up VERY early and stayed up VERY LATE to play in some TEAM events when the polish BBO site ran their contest because I was on an all bulgarian team... .(well, except for me). If you know how much I value my sleep, you will understand how much I like TEAM events.

Would it be nice to have a weekly or twice weekly BAM team game so this exotic type event can be practice on line rather than facing it once or twice a year at some major (MAJOR, MAJOR) event (these are very rare)? Anyway, I was just wondering what others think of team games... maybe it is just richard and me.

[Walddk]

I also prefer team events, but it's an illusion if you think that the B-a-M format has anything to do with teams in the proper sense of the word. B-a-M is more pairs than matchpoints!

In real team games overtrick(s) or an extra undertrick matter little, in B-a-M they matter a lot!

Roland

[Al_U_Card]

I especially like the idea of ladder teams where (like English league soccer etc.) the best 2 move up a level and the worst 2 drop a level. If the "season" were one round robin series of say 12 board matches then availability (especially of 5+ player teams) would be less of a problem.

[Rain]

Team games are much more competitive than the other events always, but needs to be easier to arrange. I can't take the stress of finding 7 players, then have abc say sorry I can't play with xyz, then have 321 say he can only play 12 boards, then have 123 say this is taking too long to organise he's now in another game.

[inquiry]

Walddk, on Dec 14 2005, 04:30 PM, said:

I also prefer team events, but it's an illusion if you think that the B-a-M format has anything to do with teams in the proper sense of the word. B-a-M is more pairs than matchpoints!

Roland

While it is true, BAM (stands for Board a match) is like matchpoints, it is still a team game, and knowing your partner's "habits" and oddities. Further, at least for me, I play BAM a little differently from normal matchpoint (not a lot) based in part on my estimates of what I think my teammates (rather than the field in general) will do on other hands.

But I agree, they are great....

[FrancesHinden]

what do you call it when 8 people play on the same side? tteeaammss?

[paulg]

Al_U_Card, on Dec 14 2005, 09:31 PM, said:

I especially like the idea of ladder teams where (like English league soccer etc.) the best 2 move up a level and the worst 2 drop a level.  If the "season" were one round robin series of say 12 board matches then availability (especially of 5+ player teams) would be less of a problem.

Never underestimate the problems of getting a team together. We had ten players in our team for the BBO.PL competitions and had terrible problems arranging matches (this may be why it's not here now?). I ran a team in a similar online ladder for many years and 18 people in the team (across time zones) did not guarantee we could fulfil fixtures.

I still like the idea of a ladder ... it's just that it's difficult to find a team captain who is willing to take the job on as those who have done it before do not want to do it again!

p

[paulg]

And like Ben I love teams .... and anything that can be done to make them easier to arrange is welcome.

p

[Walddk]

Jlall, on Dec 14 2005, 10:42 PM, said:

Walddk, on Dec 14 2005, 04:30 PM, said:

I also prefer team events, but it's an illusion if you think that the B-a-M format has anything to do with teams in the proper sense of the word. B-a-M is more pairs than matchpoints!

In real team games overtrick(s) or an extra undertrick matter little, in B-a-M they matter a lot!

Roland

huh? teams= 4 people playing at a time, on a team. pairs=2 people playing as a pair. That does not seem like a hard concept.

Thought you would understand that I was referring to the scoring format. The way B-a-M works it is matchpoint scoring (the relative difference is essential). Real team events are scored with IMPs.

One of the most important aspects of real team events (IMPs) as far as I'm concerned is the safety play. That is eliminated if you play B-a-M. Each to his own; if you prefer a team game with MP scoring, go ahead.

Roland

[han]

I'm the one vote for "they are fine as they are".

A ladder might be fun, but I prefer as little organization as possible. Log in, go to a table with friends, mention the word "teams", write down the names and start playing. What could be better?

Teams is the best bridge on BBO (a BAM tournament every once in a while would be fun but not essential). It is quick, simple, and you can select the people you like. Isn't it remarkable that everybody wants to win at teams yet there are never any unpleasant directorcalls?

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Thought you would understand that I was referring to the scoring format. The way B-a-M works it is matchpoint scoring (the relative difference is essential). Real team events are scored with IMPs.

This is nonsense. The Reisinger is one of the most prestigious team competitions in the world, and is certainly a "real team event". It is the supreme test of skill, there is far less luck involved than in any other form of the game. At IMPs many boards are of little importance. At BAM every board is of equal importance.

The fundamental difference between teams & pairs is that you control your own destiny since your teammates are "the field", rather than having to rely on comparison of results of other random people. But it has nothing to do with IMPS vs. matchpoints.
Pairs can also be scored at IMPs. It is true that most team events are IMPs, and most pair events are matchpoints, but that doesn't mean that matchpointed team events aren't team events.

[mike777]

cardsharp, on Dec 14 2005, 04:53 PM, said:

Al_U_Card, on Dec 14 2005, 09:31 PM, said:

I especially like the idea of ladder teams where (like English league soccer etc.) the best 2 move up a level and the worst 2 drop a level.   If the "season" were one round robin series of say 12 board matches then availability (especially of 5+ player teams) would be less of a problem.

Never underestimate the problems of getting a team together. We had ten players in our team for the BBO.PL competitions and had terrible problems arranging matches (this may be why it's not here now?). I ran a team in a similar online ladder for many years and 18 people in the team (across time zones) did not guarantee we could fulfil fixtures.

I still like the idea of a ladder ... it's just that it's difficult to find a team captain who is willing to take the job on as those who have done it before do not want to do it again!

p

You really hit the nail on the head...18 people on a team around the world and it is still impossible to get 4 together, on time, to play against another 18 person team.

[hrothgar]

Stephen Tu, on Dec 15 2005, 02:35 AM, said:

Quote

Thought you would understand that I was referring to the scoring format. The way B-a-M works it is matchpoint scoring (the relative difference is essential). Real team events are scored with IMPs.

BAMs were "blamed" for almost killing bridge in NYC...

BAM events are considered an extremely accurate measurement of skill. Accordingly, a relatively small group of teams dominated the BAM events. Enrollment plummeted until the districted switched over to Team events which spread the master points arorund more evenly...

[Fluffy]

I like team games, specially because then nobody can talk t me except the 3 people I want to: those a the table .

I found kenneth (helium) back last week and played for a couple of hours on the main bridge club.... While playing there I received 8 or 9 invitations for team games . That doesn't happen when you are playing a team match already.

[Dwingo]

The concept of Online Team league like the one organised by BBO Poland has great appeal but is a big pain in the neck to organise.

Whoever volunteers to organise this, please get in touch with BBO Poland folks and get feedback to see why this was dropped and what they did right and wrong and learn lessons from that.

Right now, I am the organiser for a Teams League of a BBO Private Bridge Club, whose members are restricted to players in a particular city. Even with a small field of 8 teams and knowing everyone of the participant personally and even after repeated phone calls in trying to schedule events, it is difficult to keep the momentum going. I will never again want to be the Organiser for such an event.

However, IMHO, this type of League can succeed if certain conditions are right

1) The No. of Teams are limited to a small group.
2) The participants are known to each other and are committed.
3) Participants who read their e-mail regularly.


Organising random Team games is still not that easy on BBO. People give their names to multiple Team Organisers and when you send them an invitation, they are already playing another Team Game. This really irritates me. There are others who give their names and disappear from the keyboard. They neither accept nor reject and everyone is left waiting for 2minutes, only to start the process all over again.


Godwin

[Echognome]

I noticed this thread after I posted in another:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=11609

I guess I'm a masochist. I think it's worth trying to get a league going. They are a lot of fun and I know they work well played face to face. I can foresee lots of problems, but hopefully we'll get enough dedicated teams to get a league going. If teams don't show up to play, then we will drop them from the league. If it doesn't work out, then we had a good time trying. At least that's my attitude.

[pigpenz]

hrothgar, on Dec 14 2005, 07:10 PM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Dec 15 2005, 02:35 AM, said:

Quote

Thought you would understand that I was referring to the scoring format. The way B-a-M works it is matchpoint scoring (the relative difference is essential). Real team events are scored with IMPs.

BAMs were "blamed" for almost killing bridge in NYC...

BAM events are considered an extremely accurate measurement of skill. Accordingly, a relatively small group of teams dominated the BAM events. Enrollment plummeted until the districted switched over to Team events which spread the master points arorund more evenly...

yes just like ten million brackets of KO's....the acbl is selling a product called masterpoints. I love the BAM's.

[Chamaco]

My estimate is that for a league to be running on schedules , without being hindered by people not showing up on time (or at all), every team should rely on about 8-10 players (that is, at the very least twice the players needed), so that there are enough players to subtitute the missing ones at every round (remember that many pairs just retire after 1 or 2 round and never show up anymore).

Secondly, my experience is that this sort of event should occur in a very short period of time, that is, at most 1 month.