[kenberg]

pclayton, on Nov 14 2006, 05:37 PM, said:

kenberg, on Nov 14 2006, 12:25 PM, said:

.....

5. All in all, I could imagine better but it's nice to drop down to the basement, fire up, and play.

That would explain some of the plays I've seen in the ACBL tournaments too.

Maybe I need to rephrase that.

[mike777]

kenberg, on Nov 14 2006, 06:36 PM, said:

pclayton, on Nov 14 2006, 05:37 PM, said:

kenberg, on Nov 14 2006, 12:25 PM, said:

.....

5. All in all, I could imagine better but it's nice to drop down to the basement, fire up, and play.

That would explain some of the plays I've seen in the ACBL tournaments too.

Maybe I need to rephrase that.

"Low spark of high heeled boys"

[pbleighton]

"Puff The Magic Dragon"

[mike777]

Ty all for your responses I found all of them interesting.

If nothing else I hope with all the worldwide online players in the next couple of years you guys will feel the ACBL online games reach at least an average club game level.

[keylime]

Mike,

The distance been the ACBL online games and the local club game is not as far you might think in most cases. It's the jump to the sectional level that will be interesting.

[kenberg]

Since I play in the acbl tourneys I find this topic of interest. Like brothgar, I support what the HomeBase guys are trying to do, or perhaps it's what I am hoping they will do. They charge to play, they don't give masterpoints, they don't give cash prizes. They do giive nice hand records and some analysis (which of course I may or may not agree with). In theory, this might result in an event where folks are simply looking for a good game. In practice, they don't get many takers.

One way or another, I would like to see online tourneys, acbl or elsewhere, reach a higher standard. Having a few tourneys around that discouraged pick-up partnerships, or in some way made it clear that partnerships are expected (really expected, not just pro forma expectation) in this tourney to be on the same page as far as basic auctions go, might be a start. Crazy things can happen in any game, even in competition at the highest level. But it's more frequent in online tourneys. A lot more frequent.

Ken

[pbleighton]

"If nothing else I hope with all the worldwide online players in the next couple of years you guys will feel the ACBL online games reach at least an average club game level."

The issue isn't the lack of decent or better pairs (a majority of pairs in an onkine game are reasonable), it's the number of bad pairs, which is high relative to a good club game.

Peter

[bid_em_up]

pbleighton, on Nov 15 2006, 10:18 AM, said:

"If nothing else I hope with all the worldwide online players in the next couple of years you guys will feel the ACBL online games reach at least an average club game level."

The issue isn't the lack of decent or better pairs (a majority of pairs in an onkine game are reasonable), it's the number of bad pairs, which is high relative to a good club game.

Peter

I think it is more akin to a one section club game where the beginners, intermdiates, advanced and experts are all tossed in together. And since the lower levels will almost always outnumber the upper levels, the game becomes disproportionately weighted.

Many club games will have beginner/intermediate games that are run seperately from the open games. In these games, the open game field be fairly decent, but once combined with the beginners and intermediates, the field becomes a monstrosity.

And, I dont believe that the majority of pairs in the online games are reasonable, nor are they decent. There are relatively few decent pairs actually playing from what I have experienced. There may be many good players playing together, but very few good pairs who have actually spent much time working on system agreements, carding agreements, etc.

[hrothgar]

bid_em_up, on Nov 15 2006, 07:56 PM, said:

pbleighton, on Nov 15 2006, 10:18 AM, said:

"If nothing else I hope with all the worldwide online players in the next couple of years you guys will feel the ACBL online games reach at least an average club game level."

The issue isn't the lack of decent or better pairs (a majority of pairs in an onkine game are reasonable), it's the number of bad pairs, which is high relative to a good club game.

Peter

I think it is more akin to a one section club game where the beginners, intermdiates, advanced and experts are all tossed in together. And since the lower levels will almost always outnumber the upper levels, the game becomes disproportionately weighted.

Many club games will have beginner/intermediate games that are run seperately from the open games. In these games, the open game field be fairly decent, but once combined with the beginners and intermediates, the field becomes a monstrosity.

And, I dont believe that the majority of pairs in the online games are reasonable, nor are they decent. There are relatively few decent pairs actually playing from what I have experienced. There may be many good players playing together, but very few good pairs who have actually spent much time working on system agreements, carding agreements, etc.

I think that there are quite a few good pairs playing online...

However, the best players rarely play in open tournaments or pickup games in the main lobby. Rather, they arrange set games or team mathces against one another.

Gresham's Law in action...

[ArcLight]

>However, the best players rarely play in open tournaments or pickup games in the main lobby. Rather, they arrange set games or team mathces against one another.


So that explains why Benito Garozzo never sits at my table ...

[mike777]

You guys must play in different club games then I played in several states years ago. Back then there was almost always just one combined game and many pairs did not have established systems.

Heck I played in Nat rated events where I would guess this was true of more than 50% of the partnerships including mine.

[bid_em_up]

hrothgar, on Nov 15 2006, 11:59 AM, said:

bid_em_up, on Nov 15 2006, 07:56 PM, said:

pbleighton, on Nov 15 2006, 10:18 AM, said:

"If nothing else I hope with all the worldwide online players in the next couple of years you guys will feel the ACBL online games reach at least an average club game level."

The issue isn't the lack of decent or better pairs (a majority of pairs in an onkine game are reasonable), it's the number of bad pairs, which is high relative to a good club game.

Peter

I think it is more akin to a one section club game where the beginners, intermdiates, advanced and experts are all tossed in together. And since the lower levels will almost always outnumber the upper levels, the game becomes disproportionately weighted.

Many club games will have beginner/intermediate games that are run seperately from the open games. In these games, the open game field be fairly decent, but once combined with the beginners and intermediates, the field becomes a monstrosity.

And, I dont believe that the majority of pairs in the online games are reasonable, nor are they decent. There are relatively few decent pairs actually playing from what I have experienced. There may be many good players playing together, but very few good pairs who have actually spent much time working on system agreements, carding agreements, etc.

I think that there are quite a few good pairs playing online...

However, the best players rarely play in open tournaments or pickup games in the main lobby. Rather, they arrange set games or team mathces against one another.

Gresham's Law in action...

Isnt that what I said?

Oh, excuse me....rephrase

"And, I dont believe that the majority of pairs in the online TOURNAMENT games are reasonable, nor are they decent.

That better?

Sorry, in the context it was written, I thought it was apparent that I was referring specifically to tournament games without actually having to spell it out.

[bid_em_up]

mike777, on Nov 15 2006, 01:49 PM, said:

You guys must play in different club games then I played in several states years ago. Back then there was almost always just one combined game and many pairs did not have established systems.

Heck I played in Nat rated events where I would guess this was true of more than 50% of the partnerships including mine.

Mike,

This probably has to do with where you are located more than anything (and I do not know where you live, so it is a generic statement). Since I have lived mainly in major metropolitan areas, it has not been unusual for there to be split games (Novice and open) at the major bridge clubs in these areas.

Of course, there were other games also (like the one that my first teacher ran in her home, once a week) where the pairs were usually the same pairs every week; they may have had a convention card, but for the most part, were clueless regarding any 'system', if that makes sense.

And yes, these pairs would go to sectionals, regionals and even nationals.....still just as clueless, but having fun all the way.

[mike777]

Well alot of this was in Chicago, LA and SD. Please note the pair that won the World Mixed pairs played together for the first time and one partner was very unsure of the system. .

How many times have the Blue Ribbons or LM pairs been won by a first time pair that was unsure of the system...True they are great players but still.....

In any event you did respond to my inquiry about the quality of online acbl games so thanks...I was wondering....

[pbleighton]

"And, I dont believe that the majority of pairs in the online games are reasonable, nor are they decent. There are relatively few decent pairs actually playing from what I have experienced. There may be many good players playing together, but very few good pairs who have actually spent much time working on system agreements, carding agreements, etc."

I consider most LM/BLM (300-999 mps) pairs to be decent, though where I play most don't have much in the way of system agreements, carding agreements, etc., even those who have played together for a few years.

You obviously have higher standards than I do. Good for you

Peter

[kenberg]

As I logged on I got the bbo news bulletin. ACBL online games will now be stratified. They say "There is no downside to stratification". By this they mean, I suppose, that my masterpoint award will not be less. I can't say this strongly enough: I don't give a good %&^#$O))_&&^()^%& about my masterpoint award. The purpose of stratification is to encourage a greater number of weaker players to play. This is a significant downside. The online acbl games are not suffering from a dearth of weaker players. Now if they could find a way to bring in some stronger players....

Ken

[awm]

Do you seriously think that there are people who would be willing to pay $1 to play in an ACBL tournament, but decide not to because the field is too strong? I very much doubt this is the case, especially given the strength of field here on BBO.

I suspect the stratification is more due to complaints by players who participate anyway that they're not getting the masterpoints they want/deserve. I doubt it will have much impact on attendance or strength of field.

[Al_U_Card]

Interestingly, the purpose of stratification, as perceived by the f2f players, seems to be to be compared (it is matchpoints after all in clubs but not always online) with players at their own level. The value add was that they still got to play (and learn from) the better opponents but could feel good about a 48% game.....1st in "C".

[Rain]

lotsa MP for me potentially.

[pclayton]

I would still implore the league to have flighted (NOT strati-flighted) games. I think a LM game would really attract some good pairs.

I don't see why they can't; how many zillion games do they run during the week?