[32519]

Walddk, on 2006-October-09, 04:07, said:

Expert: Someone who has enjoyed success in major national tournaments.

This definition, as stated in Rules of this Site, may be flawed, but you don't get much closer than that in my opinion. As Frances points out, we have loads of members who rate themselves as experts although they haven't won anything significant.

Roland

After reading this thread, I’m not entirely convinced with everything said here. My current F2F partner has excellent bridge savvy, logic, flair and very often bidding (and making) 3NT contracts on an outright gamble that the opponents are going to start off the defence with a) either the wrong suit, or, b) the wrong card in a suit. Yet her general (overall) knowledge of the game is extremely low when measured against the plethora of systems/conventions/methods of signalling etc. Yet she has won a number of regional red point events (with different partners) on raw talent alone.

So how does one really define an expert? Roland’s post above is certainly a yardstick.

[lamford]

An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made, in a narrow field. - Niels Bohr

[jogs]

keylime, on 2006-October-08, 16:20, said:

Bob Hamman stated, "An expert makes 2 mistakes on every hand.". I firmly believe that.

For the 1970 world championship one writer wrote a review on the boards. He nitpicked every marginal error. Best bridge book ever written. He made so many enemies, he was never allowed to report on the championships again.

[PhilKing]

lamford, on 2012-October-02, 08:21, said:

An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made, in a narrow field. - Niels Bohr

That sounds like Matthew Upson when he was at West Ham.

[dwar0123]

32519, on 2012-October-02, 06:49, said:

After reading this thread, I’m not entirely convinced with everything said here. My current F2F partner has excellent bridge savvy, logic, flair and very often bidding (and making) 3NT contracts on an outright gamble that the opponents are going to start off the defence with a) either the wrong suit, or, b) the wrong card in a suit. Yet her general (overall) knowledge of the game is extremely low when measured against the plethora of systems/conventions/methods of signalling etc. Yet she has won a number of regional red point events (with different partners) on raw talent alone.

So how does one really define an expert? Roland’s post above is certainly a yardstick.

Raw talent does not an expert make.

Combine that raw talent with a plethora of system/conventions/methods of signaling and win a number of unlimited regional gold point events.

Really just win a number of unlimited regional gold point events.

[bluecalm]

Quote

For the 1970 world championship one writer wrote a review on the boards. He nitpicked every marginal error. Best bridge book ever written. He made so many enemies, he was never allowed to report on the championships again.

Interesting.
Author/title ?

[mgoetze]

I will reiterate a suggestion I made many months ago in the "Suggestions for the Software" forum: display peoples' average MP result in robodupes on their profile.

[dwar0123]

mgoetze, on 2012-October-02, 15:42, said:

I will reiterate a suggestion I made many months ago in the "Suggestions for the Software" forum: display peoples' average MP result in robodupes on their profile.

How would you break down the different ranks based on that stat?

[mgoetze]

dwar0123, on 2012-October-02, 15:45, said:

How would you break down the different ranks based on that stat?

I haven't given it much thought and would be happy enough with the raw numbers, but perhaps

Over 58%: Expert
54%-58%: Advanced
46%-54%: Intermediate
42%-46%: Beginner
Below 42%: Novice

Of course playing with GIB specifically is something that can be trained, an expert who specifically exploits GIB's weaknesses will do better than one who has never played with GIB before. But I think this stat would be somewhat useful all the same.

[CSGibson]

The real question is: Why do you feel the need to define an expert?

[dwar0123]

CSGibson, on 2012-October-02, 17:35, said:

The real question is: Why do you feel the need to define an expert?

To some extent, for the same reason you feel the need to ask that question.

Passing curiosity.

But to answer the real question: Because it is human nature to measure ourselves against each other by some arbitrary yardstick. And I am a human.

[lalldonn]

CSGibson, on 2012-October-02, 17:35, said:

The real question is: Why do you feel the need to define an expert?

To properly set your BBO profile obv

[32519]

mgoetze, on 2012-October-02, 15:42, said:

I will reiterate a suggestion I made many months ago in the "Suggestions for the Software" forum: display peoples' average MP result in robodupes on their profile.

This is an interesting thought.
1. What would be the “minimum number” of robodupes to play in, in order to start calculating a meaningful average?
2. Would everyone also be expected to play in a “minimum number” of robodupes every month in order to keep the average up to date?

[CSGibson]

ok, I guess I was unclear. What I meant was more along the lines of What do you hope to accomplish by defining expert? It probably isn't to set your BBO profile, since they have already have adequately defined what various skill levels should be. Perhaps it is so that you can feel ok about setting a profile to expert without meeting the BBO criteria, or so that you can define others as non-experts even though they do meet the BBO criteria?

If you want a yardstick, go look at your number of masterpoints, or ribbon qualifications, or MP/Imp averages, or Platinum points, or perhaps look yourself up on http://www.colorados...PR_FILES/PR.HTM (my favorite personally because they wildly overrate my skill on that site, making me appear to be better than Eric Rodwell, even though that very ranking anomaly also completely invalidates whatever criteria by which they judge skill), or play bridge for money, whatever you want. Yardsticks are easy to find, just pick the one that makes you feel tallest & go get 'em, tiger.