[inquiry]

Couple of issues.

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

Any ohter comments that would help get this going.

[awm]

(1) Seven questions seems about right to me.

(2) A week might be good. I know I responded right away, but there may be some people who are more likely to post on weekends etc. This also has some relationship to (3).

(3) Probably the panel's time has most effect on this. Seems like twice/month is reasonable from my perspective (but I'm not on the panel).

(4) Yes, one thread per hand makes sense.

(5) Seems to me that most of the questions have more to do with judgement than system. I suppose if such a question really seems systemic a poll would make sense, but this can probably be part of the one thread per hand discussion.

[luke warm]

1) i think 5 would be better... in theory, with 5 instead of 7 you might get deeper analysis from the panel...
2) i think 3 days is about right, but you might consider posting the questions on friday...
3) i agree, every other friday
4) yes
5) i wouldn't even know how to begin such a task

[Echognome]

Once a month is standard for most polls, but twice a month is even nicer.

Don't know how the oftware is, but a webform would seem much easier than emailing responses (both for the senders and the poor tabulator).

[pigpenz]

I noticed that someone had already asked for a vote on a question where they used the vote format.....it would seem that for the users of the forum it could stay open for a longer period of time and then be compared to the panel.

[inquiry]

I would hope the question never have to deal with system essentially, but more with hand evaluation and other judgement issues. However, there will be hands (like question E) where the various answers from the panelsit may help fine tune the bidding system.

[Dwingo]

Quote

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

1. Going by success of the Pavlicek's bidding polls, I would tend to agree on 5 or six. Seven a tad too long.

Quote

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

2. If this Bidding Poll is for the long haul, make it predictable and well organised with time schedules. Once this gets recognised as a regular feature which people can look forward to month after month, this will drive traffic to this bidding Poll.

So standardisation is the key. Many of the regular forum contributors wish that more BBO regulars will contribute here. This can be a good opportunity to make this happen.

Keep the poll open for 1 full month. Give time for many to participate. Soon you will see people who play on other sites posting. Good Bidding polls have a pull effect.

Example:

1st of the month: Bidding Poll published

1st - 30th/31st of each month - Bidding Poll Open for particpants to send answers. It gives enough time to panelist to mull over the problem as well.

1st of succeeding month: Next Bidding poll is published

1st to 14th of succeeding month: Keep the discussion thread ( one thread for one problem) open for participants to discuss their answers of the previous bidding poll and then close that thread.

15th of succeeding month: Post panelist's answer with moderator's comments and participant's score.


15th to end month: Open new thread ( one thread for one problem) for Post scoring discussion and to comment on panelist's or modertor's observation. Alternatively, this can also be the continuation of thread that was opened at the beginning of the month.

Quote

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

3. My choice is once a month, but make it predictable, starting from the 1st of every month. or 15th of every month, whatever...

Quote

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

4. Yes, it makes a lot of sense.

Quote

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

5. Sure



Basically there will a lull in the 1st month. Once the 2nd poll starts, action will start and then there are discussion threads going on all through the year.

[pclayton]

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

Its fine. Too many questions and you'll lose those with a short attention span.

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

Three days is fine.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

This is more of a function of what the panel will accept. If they stay active I'd just assume have this every week. Perhaps if you get enough interest, have a rotating expert panel.

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

Yes.

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

I'm not sure what this means. But I think the director can interpret votes from a preponderance of panelists and apply it to the system of BBO - ADV or whatever it gets called.

[mike777]

pclayton, on May 4 2005, 11:00 PM, said:

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

Its fine. Too many questions and you'll lose those with a short attention span.

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

Three days is fine.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

This is more of a function of what the panel will accept. If they stay active I'd just assume have this every week. Perhaps if you get enough interest, have a rotating expert panel.

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

Yes.

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

I'm not sure what this means. But I think the director can interpret votes from a preponderance of panelists and apply it to the system of BBO - ADV or whatever it gets called.

Agree strongly with all of Phil's comments.

Taking 4-6 weeks for one forum poll to complete sounds like eternity in an internet 24hour world.

Agree, better you just use Fiat to make bidding system based on the discussion from Masters.

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on May 4 2005, 11:13 PM, said:

Couple of issues.

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

Any ohter comments that would help get this going.

Questions 1) and 3) should go together IMO.

I vote for about 8-10 hands a month.
That means either 2 polls per moth, each having 5 hands OR a single 8-hand poll in a month.

-------------------------

Question 2)

As we all are quite impatient to start discussing , I suggest that we wait 3 days before starting the discussion, while still accepting late votes for 2 extra days.

This concludes the poll within a week (1 day to post the poll, 3 days + 2).

-------------------------

Question 4)

The one-hand/one-thread concept is great!!

-------------------------

Question 5)

I don't understand the question. Does it mean we should use the result of this poll to upgrade the BBF-bidding system ?
If so, I do not think one problem hand is enough to change a system.

[Free]

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

Too many imo, 5 would be a lot better.

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic". Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

Depends on the frequency of posting new problems imo. I'd take 2-3 days maximum before going public.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

I'd say every 2 weeks should be awsome (if there are enough such problems)

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

Yes, absolutely, since otherwise it would really get chaotic since you get that many replies.

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

This might be a good idea.

[bearmum]

inquiry, on May 5 2005, 12:13 PM, said:

Couple of issues.

1.) Was seven questions too many, too few, or just about right?

2.) How long after posting the questions should the poll be left open? In two days, we have had 27 replies form members. Is two days enough? Four days? A week? The longer we wait, the longer before we can disucss the hands "in publiic".  Shorter time period will require sending the problems to the panelist before it is posted here.

3.) How frequently should we post such problems? Once a month? Twice a month? Something else.

4.) Does the one thread per hand concept (see BPO-001-A thread) make sense?

5.) After the polls close and discussion goes, should we set up user polls to decide how to "adopt" the listed system to the votes of the panelist?

Any ohter comments that would help get this going.

1 about right
2 maybe 3 days (to allow for time differences around the world) Maybe send the
probs to panellists 1 day earlier?
3 Frequency ? I guess THAT depends on how the "experts" want to do it
4 Separate threads are good IMO


Other comment - Perhaps PIN the poll to top of list until too late to vote?

I think it's a TERRIFIC idea - and thanks for all those willing to make it run so we can all enjoy participating

[inquiry]

Ok, A couple of issues.

First is the response to the BPO has been very good, so clearly we will continue these in the future. Thanks everyone for participatig in the first one on such short notice.

Second, 14 pro's agreed to participate, but then I sprung it on them very quickly, and only 9 voted. I will have to address that in the future. But it is clear the users want to vote and then get feed-back quickly. The three day range between asking question and allowing open discussion seems about right. So I will mail the questions to the pro's early (say a week before the poll is posted), so they will have almost two full weeks to vote (the week early, the three days while users vote, and the few days after user voting is over where the threads are open for public discussion).

Third, the concensus is that 7 hands is either "just right" or a few too many. So I think we will drop one, and make it a six question quiz from now on.

The time schedule above (a week for the pro's to view the hands, then a week of open discussion), means roughly every other week or so is the fastest they can be posed. Maybe every third week seems just about right. We will see what the experts will tolerate from us.

As far as the question go, I think a couple ideas in the thread are very good. The first one, Post it on "friday". I will actually try to post it on Thursday night local time for me (East Coast US). The voting will remain open unit monday local time for me. I will include a DAY and TIME that votes will be accepted in each post. Second, as suggest, the "live" voting contest will remain "pinned" to the top of this discussion group while it is possible to vote.

Clearly the one hand per thread was a clear winner. Should I continue to group the expert answers as I have been doing, or should I just post their answers and comments without my commentary along with the scores as I determine?

Again, thanks for the input and participating.

[mike777]

Thanks Ben, wonderful job.

Posting more of Master's response would be nice but still edit them. Look forward to your "biting" commentary and humor after a Master's reply.

3 weeks seems long time between polls on 24 hour internet, if mechanics can be worked out for faster replies that would be nice.

[inquiry]

mike777, on May 7 2005, 11:44 AM, said:

Thanks Ben, wonderful job.

Posting more of Master's response would be nice but still edit them. Look forward to your "biting" commentary and humor after a Master's reply.

3 weeks seems long time between polls on 24 hour internet, if mechanics can be worked out for faster replies that would be nice.

I pretty much post all of what they write. Take Roland's response to question, his actual response was...

Quote

001D. 1S. I ignore the double. Diamond support now would deny a major. I am prepared to support diamonds later unless opps compete too vigorously in hearts.

The way I reported what he said was,
And Roland, who actually found something wrong with 2♦, for him it denies a major. He planned to “ignore the double, . . . I am prepared to support diamonds later unless opps compete too vigorously in hearts.”

So I played off Beverly's there is nothing wrong with 2♦ comment to highlight panellist who specifically stated reasons why 2♦ was wrong. For the most part, other than for private comments to me, I posted everything any panelist said about a hand. Actually Roland comment above was one of only a very few where the panelist words were not provided in full... and I hope you see that the missing part (deny a major) was actually credited to him and even indicated with the ellipse.

Ben

[Walddk]

Excellent job Ben and a great initiative by many of you. I am happy to take part but must comment on the frequency.

Twice a month is too many I think, unless you accept that some of us won't reply every time. Not because we think the hands are too difficult (they may well be), but there is a time issue. All of you know what that relates to as far as I am concerned.

Another obstacle is that once in a blue moon we are away on holiday and have no access to a computer (thank goodness). That will happen in my case in June for example.

Therefore I suggest every 3 weeks. This just for consideration, other panelists may well have other ideas.

Roland

[pclayton]

Ben: This project has momentum - much more than hand of the week ever had.

Sorry Roland - a 3 week wait will seem like an eternity.

If you have enough interest, have 3 rotating platoons of experts. That way you won't burn out the experts and you'll keep it fresh for the regulars here. Further - you'll get more participation as this grows.

Seems having the problems once a week and having experts check in once every three weeks when their platoon is up solves both issues.

And experts that have the week off are happy to compete against the mortals.

[inquiry]

Well, I was thinking once every two weeks with the following schedule.

1). Hands posted on Friday (well late Thursady night local time for me)
2) Voting through Monday some time local time
3) Hands opened for discussion on Monday night local time for me
4) Long about Friday, I post the vote of the panel, the scores, and the winner.
5) Next week for further discussion of the hands as posted, system changes, etc.
6) New set of problems on the next Friday.

It seems clear, that a short time between posting problems and then posting the solutions in needed. I can expand the pool of invited gold stars and as long as we get six or seven to reply we should be ok. I invited 14, 9 replied, this time. Maybe a different subset will reply next time.

But once every two weeks is going to be very hard on me. The reason is two fold. First, it is not easy to come up with hands the panel will find either non-trivial, or that they will object to the intial actions. Second, i have to extract their answers to go with each problem, and third, deciding what scores should go with which bid takes some time after you read the "intent" of the panelist. So maybe once every three weeks is better.

The next problem set (only six questions) is almost ready. So we will give this another go. I wll ask Uday if he can post news about it for the days it is active, to see if we can drive more players here to participate. Let's see how round two goes (and of course, last weeks winner is on the panel this week....).

Ben

[Rebound]

First, I think it is great of you and the panelists to put in this effort, Ben. I'm sure we all understand and appreciate that it can be time-consuming. Just wanted to start with a big thank-you.

Speaking for myself, I can't wait for the next one, even if the experts don't seem to agree with all my bidding decisions ;-) and I really enjoyed your added commentary.

Cutting down to 6 hands seems reasonable. Perhaps even 5 would be ok if it would significantly reduce your workload and allow the quizes to be more frequent, i.e. to fit into your proposed 2-week time frame.

Just my 2 cents. Great job!

[cherdano]

Hi Ben,

thanks to you (and the panelists) for doing this! I think once every 3 weeks is absolutely fine; to make the waiting seem a little shorter, you could wait longer between posting the panel answers for each problem (and maybe not post their votes until then).

Arend