jdeegan, on Jan 10 2009, 03:47 AM, said:
I think the management might consider promoting a functional description of a person's playing ability when describing what should constitute a particular skill level. For example, it seems ridiculous for someone to describe him/herself as an expert bridge player if he/she cannot:
1. count a bridge hand whenever necessary
2. recognize and execute a simple squeeze at the table whenever they arise (most of the time).
3. endplay somebody every so often
I have noticed that some players who cannot even begin do these things advertise themselves as experts and as SLM's and GLM's as if that is some kind of big deal. What do these initials stand for? Should I avoid such people as partners? Are any of them any good, or are they ALL terrible players?
Most genuine experts who play in BBO tournament indies and with pickup partners in pair games tourneys average over +0.50 IMPs per board and over 55% at MP's playing against the field. O. Jacoby, a well-known local player in years past, claimed his average in MP tournament pairs events was 60%. Of course, in real expert versus real expert contests all bets are off - the better of the experts win, but the losers may be very, very good players, indeed.
(paragraph removed by inquiry)
I don't know why some people assume that finding a good online partner is magically easier than finding a good offline partner. I'm not even talking about expert partners, just finding a polite partner who wants to enjoy the game for the game's sake and leaves his ego at the door is good enough.
When you sit down to play with a stranger online, all best are initially off. He may be an expert, he may not, he may be polite, he may not, etc etc. The difficult lesson all onliners have to learn at some point (whether it's playing bridge or anything else online) is that you have to put in as much hard work into an online partnership as you do in a offline partnership. And the very first step of this hard work is weeding out the people you are uncomfortable playing with. Once this basic fact of online interactions sans recommendation systems is recognized, the modus operandi of playing with a stranger online is simple -
1. Start playing with no assumptions.
2. If you're uncomfortable for any reason, tag then for future reference, and stop playing.
3. If, luckily you do enjoy playing with them, work on the relationship. Be a good partner yourself. And this means being supportive, non critical, and trying to make the game fun and enjoyable for everyone.
Build up a circle of friends over time. Step out of your comfort zone. I suspect that a lot of people who complain that experts on BBO are not expert won't even consider playing with an intermediate on BBO. Give it a shot. You may be pleasantly surprised. And even if you're not, you have more FUN than playing with an "expert" in a worry-free and good-humored environment.
Whining about "experts" on the forums may be good for venting your frustrations but not for much else. Consider how you can change the way you approach playing online on BBO and perhaps you'll have more enjoyable experiences than negative ones.
Asking the management to do something about a non-existent problem is a no-gainer for everyone.
EDIT - If you are an expert, let Fred's principle of 'giving back to the game that gave you so much' guide you. Partner advanced/intermediates sometimes and help them improve. You'll enjoy it. Trying to get expert partners and opponents every time you sit down to play in a pickup game is unrealistic; it won't magically happen, you'll have to put in lot of work before it does.
Alle Menschen werden bruder.
Where were you while we were getting high?
Help
