[OldPlayr]

The 'find a game' function should let one specify the bidding system that they want a partner to play. That would save having to get placed at a table, check the partners profile, and leave if they do not play my system (or have no system listed, as is common). I often have to go through several tables before I find someone who plays SAYC. Less common systems must be much worse.

Even better would be to allow the find a game request to specify multiple attributes for a partner match. Bidding system, listed skill level, completion percentages, number of logins, or whatever else BBO tracks on players.

Better partner matching would greatly improve the appeal of the site for individual players. Sort of like a dating site

[barmar]

People describe their systems in so many ways, I think it would be hard to do that. They also do things like put parts of their system in the place that's supposed to hold their name, when they run out of room in the systems field.

[jbaptistec]

What about filtering by country instead of system ?

[semeai]

barmar, on 2012-August-31, 09:16, said:

People describe their systems in so many ways, I think it would be hard to do that. They also do things like put parts of their system in the place that's supposed to hold their name, when they run out of room in the systems field.

I agree, but certainly something can be done here. If you can figure out what (among the data that you have) makes two people stay at the same time playing with each other for an extended period of time after using the "find a game" function, that would be great. You have access to lots of data, so you could make some hypotheses and test them out, and then build them in as (probabilistic?) preferences for the "find a game" function.

Some example hypotheses:

1) Two players with the string "sayc" in their profile are more likely to play together longer. [Similarly for the strings "2/1" "sef" etc]

2) Two players with a non-empty name field which contains no numbers or symbols [other than those commonly found in real names, like ' and -] and at most three contiguous strings of letters are more likely to play together longer [supposed to model people who put a name in their name field]. Similarly for two players with non-empty name fields which do not meet the criterion in the previous sentence [supposed to model people who put system data in their name field].

3) Two players from the same country.

4) Two players of the same level.

5) Two people with multiple instances of capitalized words in their profile (i.e. instances of a capital letter followed by lower case letters) will play together longer. Similarly for two people with no instances of capital letters in their profile. Similarly for two people with all caps in their profile.

And so on.

[OldPlayr]

I'd settle for just being able to select partners with a top level bidding system in their profile.

As suggested - show me openings where the partner has "SAYC" in their profile. That alone eliminates the 50% that I find with no profile at all. I often have to jump through dozens of open spots before finding a player with the same system. Just a simple string search of available profiles when assigning a seat would be of great benefit.

I agree that any more complex partner matching may require a change or addition to the current profile capability. While more complex matching would be great, just start simple.

Bidding system is the characteristic that I care about most. Country is not something that I'd use, as I enjoy meeting people from different countries. Maybe online bridge can help international relations

[Bbradley62]

OldPlayr, on 2012-September-03, 17:20, said:

I'd settle for just being able to select partners with a top level bidding system in their profile.

As suggested - show me openings where the partner has "SAYC" in their profile.

You are very funny. Are you really suggesting that "SAYC" is "a top level bidding system"? SAYC is what you teach beginners. It is also how we "dumb down" bridge so that a room full of people who do not know each other can all play together at the lowest-common demonimator without require a lot of conversation about bidding agreements.

[Antrax]

"top level" as in "without going into many details".

[helene_t]

I think the solution is to make clubs for players of specific systems, like the very succesful Acol club.

A SAYC club might be less succesful, though, since so many people think that SAYC just means "whatever flavor of 5cM I happen to play".

[mr1303]

Perhaps some sort of check box system on one's profile might be in order?

[OldPlayr]

My point is simply that having "SAYC" in a profile is better than nothing when placing one at a table. I'm not looking for a lifetime partner, just less time table hopping, trying to find someone without a blank profile or something that I don't want to play. Once the match narrows down the selection, I can always read the fine print in the profile. I usually just stop by the site for an hour or so to pass some time & don't want to spend time finding a partner who knows at least the basics.

After a career in software, I try to ask for small things, that the site can do easily. Yes, some major profile definition improvement could match people who play all sorts of complex convention combinations. That would be great, but I just want a simple first step. 20% of the work may yield 80% of the possible benefit. I do like the profile check box suggestion, though.

[Quantumcat]

mr1303, on 2012-September-04, 10:25, said:

Perhaps some sort of check box system on one's profile might be in order?

This is a good idea - especially if there were pre-loaded convention cards for a number of systems (with just the basics), and when placed with a pickup partner, the system you had in common had its CC loaded automatically for you. No need for conversation with your non-english speaking partner, then.

[barmar]

mr1303, on 2012-September-04, 10:25, said:

Perhaps some sort of check box system on one's profile might be in order?

Users of the Windows version will not be able to see or fill in such a checkbox. But they could login to the web version, update their profile, then go back to the Windows version.

[OldPlayr]

It sure is tedious jumping in and out of many 'find a partner' tables before finding someone who does not have either a blank profile, or a system that I don't wish to play....

I can't believe that it a tough coding task to add a check-box bidding system selection to profiles and optionally use it in find a partner.

[cloa513]

Alternatively just make the first line of the profile
System:
and advise people to use standard terms SAYC or 2 over 1 or ACOL or other.

[OldPlayr]

How about at least an option to 'exclude blank profiles"? Tired of spending 10 minutes jumping in and out of tables to find a game.

Lots of good ideas in this forum. Do any of these suggestions ever get implemented?

[barmar]

OldPlayr, on 2012-October-28, 07:00, said:

Lots of good ideas in this forum. Do any of these suggestions ever get implemented?

Eventually. The suggestion to allow the human to play when robot becomes declarer, for instance.

[Thiros]

OldPlayr, on 2012-August-30, 17:40, said:

Sort of like a dating site

All these players with "girl" in their screen name that I've seen during my years on BBO. I should have known that wasn't by accident...

[secondtime]

What about adding approximately 4 characters to the user name which shows up in the Who's Online/table lists?

Those 4 characters could be used for such system designations as: SAYC, SA, 2/1, acol, SEF..... etc. Being able to quickly scan the tables for this type of system overview would be extremely helpful.