[christila]

Hi Folks,

Is there a way to leverage bboskill.com methods or some other data to determine the skill level of players in lieu of, or in addition to, the self rating? I know it is a constant source of irritation how many self-proclaimed experts we have out there. Would be lovely to come up with an objective measure of skill level. It wouldn't be perfect, but at least would be more than just fluff...

~ christine

[diana_eva]

Hi Christine, welcome to the forums.

There's a long discussion on ratings pinned in the General BBO Discussion Forum. Here's the link if you want to read through what has been discussed already:
http://www.bridgebas...rating-players/

[Fluffy]

What's wrong with being fluff?

[mycroft]

Short answer - as said above, the long answer has been given to death:

I have approximately the same rating as Dano de Falco (I don't, because I don't play much online any more; time and a regular offline partner. But I expect to place in any event I play. So let's posit that for the sake of argument). Am I as good as him? Anywhere near? Of course not. So why the same ratings? Because I play with BBO randoms playing pickup (and offline, with a specified set of players) and I'm pretty Ave+ in that environment. Mr. de Falco plays with Jimmy Cayne against very good to known world-class opposition, and he's pretty Ave+ against them.

Similar example: I am a better player than Sabine Auken. That was argued (in court) because in a world-wide pairs event, I scored 53% (in a tiny club with at best intermediate players) and she and her partner scored 51% (I assume in a major city club, with a client, against much better opposition). Needless to say, when given the opportunity, I made it clear why that logic was - incomplete.

And there's nothing wrong with fluff. It just has to be accurate fluff, right?

[christila]

Thanks for the links and the comments. Sorry, I must have searched poorly before posting. Giving self "NOVICE" rating for searching; no fluff about it!