[Phil]

There has been a request to have more stringent moderation in the A/E forum. Many of the threads belong in a different forum (this one clearly does (for multiple reasons) - probably 2/1 + SAYC), and many responses to threads are not suitable much less accurate, and do not belong in an A/E thread. If you feel like giving an 'opinion', and you are a relatively newer or inexperienced player, than the A/E is not the place to post.

Fortunately, there is a very strong group of players that frequents the forums. About 12-15 are regulars that could either represent their country, or are competitive in national events if they are from a larger country. There are countless more players that either lurk on the forums, or post.

BBF is great; if you are a newer player, you can post a problem and get answered by a really good player whose opinion you trust in any forum other than the A/E. Isn't that awesome? It costs nothing.

Since bridge is a game that even great players are continually learning, really good players would like to post problems too, and have them answered by their peers, or perhaps players that are a notch above them. They have no interest in trying to sort out responses from people they do not know, or do not trust their answers. This is, or should be, the role of the A/E.

Until the A/E is better moderated, the forum will be self-policed. Like any tribe, the senior members have an obligation to keep the junior members in line. The junior players should look to this, not as a threat, but an opportunity to learn. If there is occasionally bitter medicine doled out, it serves as a check and balance.

If you aren't sure which forum to post a new thread in, think of it as the person that strolls into a Rolls-Royce dealership and asked what the Corniche costs. The salesperson sternly answers, "Sir, if you have to ask, you can't afford it". If you aren't sure what forum to post in, please don't post in the A/E and don't be surprised if you get an earful as a result.

[Cyberyeti]

rduran1216, on 2011-January-14, 16:28, said:

if you believe the 1S bid is akin to opening 1NT on 21 then thats fine.

However, you could also acknowledge that after 1H 2C 2D 2S 3NT

I face the choice of showing 6-5 or possibly missing the 6-5 spot by bidding 4C to show such a big hand, and if I choose to bid 4C, partner will never think I have 5 spades since I only 4th suited. If you believe this is the kind of problem that a beginner would be concerned about with their first bid, then so be it.

But as it is, I realized after 3H it was a bad bid, and if the answer is I have to guess now then thats fine.

In that example there are lots of things you can do, I'd probably bid 5♠ which for me and partner would suggest a good hand with 5 indifferent spades, 6 good clubs and not too worried about the red suits, partner has guaranteed some sort of spade fit with 3N.

[MrAce]

Too many explenations and excuses for jumping into a topic and starting adv/exp/interm seperation or acting like a police. Funny as it is, they seem to ignore there are actually regular posters of A/E section, who replied this post and keep on replying Doesnt it tell u something ?

Look who has been replying to this topic (listed below) w/o making a big deal out of where it belongs to. If there are members of this forum, who felt the neccesitty to reply to this topic, i think you should at least respect them and the time they spent to reply, instead of worrying about your 2 mouse click time, or instead of seeing yourself as a senior tribe member and acting like one. Besides, who is advanced or expert or intermediate is not seperated with a clear line, there is no way to make an accurate measurement either, and as we all know people tend to rate themselves high. Therefore this kinda self-policing leads to arguments that are waste of time imo.

P_Marlowe

655321

mike777

cherdano

gnasher

Jlogic

whereagles

nige1

cyberyeti

fluffy

dake50

2forbridge

[mtvesuvius]

Edit, misread Timo's post...

Anyway, Timo, you are still missing the point. The DEFINITION of the B/I forum is

Quote

For our novice to intermediate members to discuss issues and share advice (and for more skilled players to answer questions .

This is part of the definition!! How much clearer can it be?

It's seeming more and more like we're talking to brick walls. Seriously, this forum does need work, and I agree 100% with Phil & Matmat's posts... I think they phrased it very well (and very clearly). There are clearly a group of people who feel this forum is really just another random place to post hands, and I agree with him. I remember an idea from a few years ago to have an invitational only forum as well. I think this would be a nice idea, but once again it will be tough to decide who meets the requirements.

With the ability to upvote posts now, perhaps the criteria to enter should be, say, a reputation of 20? This would weed out the majority of people who make bad/unhelpful posts, and leave people who make enjoyable posts of some sort, whether funny, helpful, interesting, or some combo of all three.

The other option would be to have a "panel" or something, perhaps the winners of a bidding contest.

This post has been edited by mtvesuvius: 2011-January-14, 22:18

[Cascade]

Some comments and responses:

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 01:32, said:

well lets say the auction goes

1H 2C
2NT 3S
3NT ?

And now we're on a total guess whether partner is 3532 or 2533 or even 2524.

This was my concern at the table when I bid 1S.

Is this an unreasonable fear?

With shape I pretty much always bid out my shape. If the hand is too strong for 4♠ then I bid 5♠ which would have to be forcing. Its not perfect but some hands are are to bid.

I would hope partner is not 2=5=2=4 - I expect a club raise with that.

cherdano, on 2011-January-13, 03:11, said:

1S is nuts. Distorting suit lengths in a likely slam hand is deadly.

You can't get much better advice than that.

JLOGIC, on 2011-January-13, 04:38, said:

Don't know if you knew this but you have more clubs than spades

LOL

This is Justin's best attempt at copying cherdano's advice above.

Fluffy, on 2011-January-13, 07:32, said:

Since I play 4♣ now as cuebid, only 6♣ is left, that's my bid.

I would also start with 1♠ on most 5-6 hands, but the suit quality disparity makes me think 2♣ is better this time.

Yep after 3♥ I play new suits are cues and I have to jump to show a distributional two suiter. Its not ideal but it makes hands with support and slam ambition easy (well at least easier) to bid.

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 11:35, said:

look i realize 1S is wrong. Seriously, you guys wonder why bridge is dying, when 75% of the good players are stuck up assholes all the time. And lets not get into "nobody would bid 1S, why is this in this forum, duh lolz, idiot, etc." I realize its a bad bid, it didn't take long after partner bid 3H that I knew I'd backed myself into a corner. I'm trying to decide between 7C and 6NT and how to navigate there.

How about after

1H 2C
3H ?

1. Five spades is less of a problem as partner won't have three spades all that often

2. Depends what 3♥ means. If it is suit setting then we just cue-bid. If not then I still play new suits are cue-bids and would have to jump (and hope partner doesn't think it is exclusion or something exotic)

Phil, on 2011-January-13, 13:13, said:

I wish the % was this low

rduran1216, on 2011-January-14, 12:11, said:

If you genuinely believe that first paragraph, you have very poor reading comprehension and like most nerds can't see subtleties in language and read people's intent from word choice. This is no different than how things work offline. There are great players I would never take a problem to because of their superiority complexes regarding how they play. About the only person I've taken problems to that I don't mind his responses no matter how condescending is Steve Sturm, but thats cause he's a riot and a nice guy.

Point is, it is possible to answer a question you think is obvious without being a jackass. Essentially everyone in this thread had the same response, but there's a difference between 2C is better than 1S, and "1S is ridiculous"

I know decency is hard, especially amongst people who have so many friends in real life that they spend their time online talking trash, but its a fine line.

And I realize I'm guilty of exactly what I'm echoing with that last part, it is my nature to be confrontational after an initial slight.

Personally I often have a pretty thin skin but I wouldn't care about "1♠ is ridiculous" to me that is not a personal attack. It is just an opinion about a bid.

Your attack of jillybean is at least an order of magnitude more personal.

matmat, on 2011-January-14, 12:32, said:

by-the-by, the percentage isn't much different for not-so-good players, either.

My experience is that most better players are fine people and that there is more unpleasantness generated by some "not-so-good" players. Of course there are exceptions - particularly many fine lesser players.

[Fluffy]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-January-14, 22:06, said:

With the ability to upvote posts now, perhaps the criteria to enter should be, say, a reputation of 20? This would weed out the majority of people who make bad/unhelpful posts, and leave people who make enjoyable posts of some sort, whether funny, helpful, interesting, or some combo of all three.

It is so easy to alter your own reputation, so it is not very helpful. And too much dependant on how long you've been on the forums.

IMO people forget that A/E forum also reads advanced, while it also reads advanced there will be more posts that qualify for it than the regulars want it to.

[cherdano]

rduran1216, on 2011-January-14, 16:28, said:

But as it is, I realized after 3H it was a bad bid, and if the answer is I have to guess now then thats fine.

I would suggest that we don't post auctions in the A/E forum where we know we have previously made a bad bid.
(In fact I would suggest this for any forum.)

[MrAce]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-January-14, 22:06, said:

Edit, misread Timo's post...

Anyway, Timo, you are still missing the point. The DEFINITION of the B/I forum is

I saw the definition when it was first posted, and i admit i have to take my suggestion back about intermediate players seeking expert answers should be able to post here...but noone seems to answer or make a comment about what i actually tried to say. So let me make it more clear, and ask this time.

-What are our criterias to determine if a post is advanced or intermediate or expert ? Is there such a clear border to seperate them ? Or are we all supposed to believe that it doesn't belong here just because some SENIOR members said so ?

-If we have criterias, what makes you or Phil or Matmat or me think ours is RIGHT and moderator's is WRONG ? (Since some of us mentioned forums needs work, or not moderated well enough)

And look at the suggestions/observations some of us came up with;

1- Forum is not moderated good, so like all tribes it should be self-policed by senior members and newer members should follow them !! Wow

2-Maybe a forum for invited people ? And make a bidding contest to figure who should be invited ? Votes and all ? WOW WOW WOW.

What is next ? Should members be required to have an A/E tatoo under their eye and MUST shoot or stab an intermediate to join the gang ? (Joke mate )

Anyway, in my personal opinion, jumping into someone's topic and telling the level of topic is too low to be here, by any member, is postjacking. Especially doing this when there are some really decent players who are currently involved and replying to the topic. So i agree with all of you about your goal, i disagree with your methods.

[MrAce]

cherdano, on 2011-January-15, 04:53, said:

I would suggest that we don't post auctions in the A/E forum where we know we have previously made a bad bid.
(In fact I would suggest this for any forum.)

Agreed.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-January-14, 22:06, said:

I remember an idea from a few years ago to have an invitational only forum as well. I think this would be a nice idea, but once again it will be tough to decide who meets the requirements.

The separate forum heading could be ( right below the A/E forum):


By Invitation Only
.... Forum exclusively designated for stuck up @$$holes

I still like the idea of "just click out" if you have issues with the post... or poster.
But I realize it is more fun to subject someone to public ridicule.

[OleBerg]

Phil, on 2011-January-14, 16:30, said:

There has been a request to have more stringent moderation in the A/E forum. Many of the threads belong in a different forum (this one clearly does (for multiple reasons) - probably 2/1 + SAYC), and many responses to threads are not suitable much less accurate, and do not belong in an A/E thread. If you feel like giving an 'opinion', and you are a relatively newer or inexperienced player, than the A/E is not the place to post.

Fortunately, there is a very strong group of players that frequents the forums. About 12-15 are regulars that could either represent their country, or are competitive in national events if they are from a larger country. There are countless more players that either lurk on the forums, or post.

BBF is great; if you are a newer player, you can post a problem and get answered by a really good player whose opinion you trust in any forum other than the A/E. Isn't that awesome? It costs nothing.

Since bridge is a game that even great players are continually learning, really good players would like to post problems too, and have them answered by their peers, or perhaps players that are a notch above them. They have no interest in trying to sort out responses from people they do not know, or do not trust their answers. This is, or should be, the role of the A/E.

Until the A/E is better moderated, the forum will be self-policed. Like any tribe, the senior members have an obligation to keep the junior members in line. The junior players should look to this, not as a threat, but an opportunity to learn. If there is occasionally bitter medicine doled out, it serves as a check and balance.

If you aren't sure which forum to post a new thread in, think of it as the person that strolls into a Rolls-Royce dealership and asked what the Corniche costs. The salesperson sternly answers, "Sir, if you have to ask, you can't afford it". If you aren't sure what forum to post in, please don't post in the A/E and don't be surprised if you get an earful as a result.

Leave it unmoderated. As it is, it is a great learning place. When people get the reply "wrong forum", it need not be taken litteraly, but rather meaning: "The answer is obvious." People who think posters in here are stuck up assholes or similiar, should buckle up.

[OleBerg]

I don't like the idée of any restraints for posting here.

Post what you want, and if you get some heat; live with it or leave.

And for the good players: If you see a post you don't like, it doesn't take long to post: "Wrong forum". And if you don't even want to bother with that, don't worry. Somebody else will.

And for B/I players: If you post here, and you only get one reply that says "wrong forum" may suggestion is (Tada): Post it in another forum.

[OleBerg]

MrAce, on 2011-January-15, 06:01, said:

Agreed.

Disagree.

I am sure it never happens to you, but many advanced players sometimes makes bids they immidiately regret, and then have to try and salvage what they can. In my opinion such situations are fine to learn from. For instance it can highlight some of the reasons it was a bad bid.

[hotShot]

Look at at the last set of boards played in long matches at the final rounds of the Bermuda Bowl and learn that even WC player make stupid errors.
I see the merits of a B/I forum and an A/E forum, but unless every post is evaluated by an independent council, this will not work.

Take an example where a game could be made finessing the right side, this is most likely a question of counting typical for a B/I problem, but an expert could discover that a subtle double squeese is the better solution which would make the whole problem A/E.

[MrAce]

OleBerg, on 2011-January-15, 07:07, said:

Leave it unmoderated. As it is ..............

I am fairly new here so i wouldn't know, is it literally unmoderated ?

[gnasher]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-January-14, 22:06, said:

With the ability to upvote posts now, perhaps the criteria to enter should be, say, a reputation of 20? This would weed out the majority of people who make bad/unhelpful posts, and leave people who make enjoyable posts of some sort, whether funny, helpful, interesting, or some combo of all three.

That would have the effect of encouraging conformity and discouraging new members. I think that would be bad.

Anyway, the "reputation" figures don't seem correlate closely with expertise. For example, your suggested threshold would exclude dburn, wank, mickyb and rhm.

[gnasher]

cherdano, on 2011-January-15, 04:53, said:

I would suggest that we don't post auctions in the A/E forum where we know we have previously made a bad bid.
(In fact I would suggest this for any forum.)

That's going too far - you can still have interesting problems even after making a bad bid. Better advice would be "If you know you have made a bad bid, don't blame the system, try to argue that it's not a bad bid, or criticise others for saying it's a bad bid."

[gnasher]

rduran1216, on 2011-January-14, 12:11, said:

Point is, it is possible to answer a question you think is obvious without being a jackass. Essentially everyone in this thread had the same response, but there's a difference between 2C is better than 1S, and "1S is ridiculous"

So describing a bid as "ridiculous" makes you a jackass? Maybe this post will cause you to reconsider that opinion:

http://www.bridgebas...__1#entry521568

[OleBerg]

gnasher, on 2011-January-15, 08:35, said:

So describing a bid as "ridiculous" makes you a jackass? Maybe this post will cause you to reconsider that opinion:

http://www.bridgebas...__1#entry521568

WD

[OleBerg]

MrAce, on 2011-January-15, 07:54, said:

I am fairly new here so i wouldn't know, is it literally unmoderated ?

No, but you have to be more than a stuck-up asshole to have a post moderated. (I know, because I've had one moderated. Completely unfairly off course )