lycier, on 2016-January-07, 19:52, said:
Here I suggest to close bbo self-rating system due to uselessness.
Every day you usually see a phenomenon at bbo, too many people as a table host only select "expert" to join the table in the MBC. I had made some investigation on it, some of my friends told me that they were forced to use "expert" self-rating online on the different usernames, if they didn't do such, they will have no way to play normally with others online because most of table hosts thought only both of expert and world class are decent players, otherwise the rest are weak and bad players. If they use "expert" self-rating ,of course,they can do as they like.
Even those opinions are one-sided, it is a fact. So I guess you would meet some strange things at bbo,some "world class" often play worse than beginners. Of course, this is a joker. Actually "World Class" don't be claimed because we know who is,who not.
At BBO, if self rating "World Class" without star symbol, "World Class" = W.C. in the most situations, I believe many people think so.
I don't think it is entirely useless. Although there are obviously many exceptions, my own observation based on frequent play in MBC is that there is a statistical correlation between self-rating and actual skill. After adjusting for certain nationalities, I find that self rated "experts" are at least competent on basics maybe two thirds of the time. I may have to adjust some expectations (rebidding of 5 card suits, 4NT always keycard, etc), but often I can manage. Whereas self rated "intermediates" are almost always very weak, usually not knowing fundamentals like basic ranges for bids, simple attitude signals, etc. "Advanced" is a middle ground, and seems to have the widest range. So despite the variance, there is utility to this, it definitely works better than picking partners totally at random.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn