[jtfanclub]

mgoetze, on May 15 2007, 10:11 AM, said:

What do I do if I want to play with people who want to play with "someone who is comparable in skill to most other members of BBO"? Do I choose the mode (probably "expert"), the median (probably "advanced"), or do I fall back to the definition found in "rules of this site"?

I would say Advanced.

Keep in mind, when you're looking for a table, if you rate yourself as Expert and aren't used to playing with Expert partners, your partner will likely be disappointed.

Private says "If you pay attention to these ratings, don't play with me".

[DrTodd13]

DJNeill, on May 15 2007, 07:25 AM, said:

Todd already has suggested the best way of rating: peer-rating like on Ebay. Who would you rather trust, 2000+ players collective opinion or the player's own opinion/whim/whatever? It might not be 100% perfect but is far better than the faux-rating system we have now.

Would be not too non-trivial to program, I think?

Dan

It is pretty trivial to code. It is already written and I even shared the code with Uday. It is just a matter of getting sufficient demand for Fred to decide to do something.

[jmc]

If you are looking to play with people outside of a trusted group the overhead of setting up the game becomes prohibitive. Who wants to spend 15 minutes putting together a table of unknowns in order to play 10 minutes before one leaves.

Ratings like those on other sites do not help the situation in my opinion. It just makes people even more paranoid about playing with only similiar levels of players, else see their precious rating decrease.

All this overhead to starting a bridge game with random ops or especially with random partners, is why I'd rather just play some chess, read the forums, or muck cards in texas hold'em than set up a random game.

jmc

[redbird97]

The next time you see a World Class without a star, ask them what country they represented and what event they played it!