[eagles123]

I've been playing for about 35 weeks as a guest at my club simply because it's cheaper as a student and I really can't be bothered to pay out the membership fee. I have learnt however that any masterpoints I earn won't count until I become a member. I'm going to sign up so my partners points count (they requested i do so) but I have to say i couldn't give two hoots about these points and the ranking system. It seems to me just an attendance grade i.e. if you attend 1000000000 avents you're bound to rack up a few points? Am I wrong? Is there merit in the system?

[StevenG]

You're right about the points being meaningless - but other people do like them, and they act as a marketing tool for the EBU (or, at least, the EBU think they do).

I don't see any reason why your not being an EBU member should stop any points your partner wins from being credited to him.

[Vampyr]

In the USA masterpoints are very important, because they hold loads of bracketed events, and you can't get into the upper brackets without lots of points. I believe that masterpoints are used for seeding purposes as well.

Here masterpoints are much less important. Some seeding is done to balance out lines for starting positions, and this might be done by looking at masterpoints, or gold points, or just by knowledge of the players. In any case it is not a big deal.

But membership of the club (and thereby the EBU) provides more than just masterpoints. You get the magazine, the right to enter tournaments and knockout events, and the right to represent your club or county. Larger member numbers enable the EBU to get partnerships (like the one with Bridge Overseas, which have negotiated better rates at tournament venues) and to get more money from advertisers in the magazine, and hopefully attract sponsorship.

Also your club might have various competitions apart from the regular duplicate, as well as events which are free for members, eg Christmas party, and as a member you have the right to participate in these.

Finally, your club and EBU membership also gives you county membership, so that you can go to the county AGM, vote for the committee or stand for it yourself, plus larger numbers mean more county delegates to the EBU, thus a better chance of the EBU making decisions that are favourable to your county.

Most people I know are members of two or three clubs.

[aguahombre]

Just for information: in ACBL, if you are allowed to play in a Sanctioned game, but are not an ACBL member, your member-partner would still get his/her points. There is one exception: a special "membership" club game, where if one player isn't an ACBL member neither gets points earned.

Private membership organizations may restrict who plays in their games (and become "invitational" clubs with lower awards); but they cannot refuse to submit points earned by anyone allowed to play.

[RunemPard]

I like what they are doing here in Sweden and couldn't really imagine enjoying bridge as much as I do here in another country. (I am extremely competitive about rating type stuff.) Masterpoints(mostly bronze) mean absolutely NOTHING to me. The only stats I get excited about are the handicap system they use here and of course playing bridge. It has some flaws, but basically it is a rating. You start at 52 and cannot go above that. Based on the field's handicap, there is a tournament average. The number of boards and tournament level affect the change as well.

For example...

Let's say Sam and Samantha are 52 HCP and have just started playing bridge. They are ambitious and go to play at a clubs biggest evening. The average HCP may be 32(lower is better). Based on the 20 point difference, you get roughly +10% added to your scratch result for the HCP result.

On a normal club evening, 1% above or below 50% on the HCP result will usually gain/lose you .1 HCP points. They play amazing and manage to finish with 60% in scratch as beginners. Based on the field, they were expected to finish with about 39-40%. So their HCP result is about 70%. This brings them down somewhere between 1.5-2 points.

The flaws...I had been playing spades for many years before bridge, so when I started playing I had a huge advantage and dropped quickly. For awhile, I was playing much better than my HCP showed. If a field is weaker, it can be easier to get very high results and a more safe 50% HCP. But honestly, if you look at a club and know the players, it usually reflects very well how skilled they are.

I wonder why other countries haven't gone this route.

[Cyberyeti]

Eagles, not earning masterpoints allows you to bandit the ranked masters, which will make you quite unpopular if you do it and people realise what you've done.

Runem, there are plenty of older people in the UK who are the ones that pay the money to keep the events going and have accumulated many masterpoints over the years. Going to a current form system would tick off these people so it doesn't happen as a replacement, it sort of happens in parallel.

[RunemPard]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-February-24, 17:11, said:

Eagles, not earning masterpoints allows you to bandit the ranked masters, which will make you quite unpopular if you do it and people realise what you've done.

Runem, there are plenty of older people in the UK who are the ones that pay the money to keep the events going and have accumulated many masterpoints over the years. Going to a current form system would tick off these people so it doesn't happen as a replacement, it sort of happens in parallel.

I don't really understand...Are you saying that I am suggesting a replacement? This is done here with both masterpoints awarded and a completely separate HCP. For example in Sweden I am currently ranked 8,266 in masterpoints, but 639 in HCP. It just gives another statistic for those who care, and those who don't just ignore it.

As a junior, or hell any player new to bridge who is eager to improve and be competitive, HCP is an instant way to see how you are doing compared to your level. To get a good rank using masterpoints, you have to play a lot and often to see any real gains. With HCP you can play much less and still go up large amounts in rank. Most clubs will print out a scratch and HCP result and some give prizes to both.

I really like it, and as I said I don't think I would care so much about bridge if I didn't feel I was achieving anything other than some silly points that won't accumulate until I am older.

[wank]

yes masterpoints in england are essentially meaningless and pretty useless. in fact not having them is good in a way because in national tournaments there are certain prizes available for the highest ranked pair below a certain master point level, though EBU prizes are pathetic and making any particular effort to get them isn't worth it, plus some people might consider ducking them to pick-up bunny prizes to be a little dirty. the ngs - national grading system - is a far more worthwhile measure of achievement for club and county level players.

the ebu magazine which is mentioned up-thread is a waste of time for anyone who can count to 13. it was dumbed down under the previous ebu chairman, so hopefully it might perk up now there's someone new in.

[Cyberyeti]

RunemPard, on 2014-February-24, 17:19, said:

I don't really understand...Are you saying that I am suggesting a replacement? This is done here with both masterpoints awarded and a completely separate HCP. For example in Sweden I am currently ranked 8,266 in masterpoints, but 639 in HCP. It just gives another statistic for those who care, and those who don't just ignore it.

As a junior, or hell any player new to bridge who is eager to improve and be competitive, HCP is an instant way to see how you are doing compared to your level. To get a good rank using masterpoints, you have to play a lot and often to see any real gains. With HCP you can play much less and still go up large amounts in rank. Most clubs will print out a scratch and HCP result and some give prizes to both.

I really like it, and as I said I don't think I would care so much about bridge if I didn't feel I was achieving anything other than some silly points that won't accumulate until I am older.

I'm saying the people who care about masterpoints are the ones the EBU have to keep happy, so MPs which as wank says are a waste of time are the ones that are used for entry to national tournaments. Ours are particularly stupid, in that we split them between local and national masterpoints. I was for a long time in a situation where I had enough national masterpoints to be 2 ranks higher than I actually was because I don't play much club bridge, and you required 600 total of which at least 150 were national, I had 500, 300 of which were national, fortunately the ratio comes down on the higher ranks so I will catch up, but I'll be close to enough nationals for grandmaster when I (shortly) actually ding the level below.

[1eyedjack]

Feel compelled to say that I can’t get excited about handicap events. I do get the point. It shows where each pair performs on the night relative to expectations computed from previous lifetime performance. But then I can’t help unpicking the handicap to find out who actually WON.

[Vampyr]

1eyedjack, on 2014-February-24, 22:37, said:

Feel compelled to say that I can’t get excited about handicap events. I do get the point. It shows where each pair performs on the night relative to expectations computed from previous lifetime performance. But then I can’t help unpicking the handicap to find out who actually WON.

For some competitions it is possible to have both; this way people who don't usually win prizes or trophies the chance to win one.

[Zelandakh]

I felt exactly the same way about it eagles and did not even register my club points when I got an (automatic) student membership back in the day. Sometimes people said "Wait and see, you will be glad of having them" but that never came. If you are very ambitious then I suppose having a large pool of points might make it easier to find a better partner, but these days there is also the performance database for that, which I strongly suspect would have a higher weight.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2014-February-25, 05:37, said:

I felt exactly the same way about it eagles and did not even register my club points when I got an (automatic) student membership back in the day. Sometimes people said "Wait and see, you will be glad of having them" but that never came. If you are very ambitious then I suppose having a large pool of points might make it easier to find a better partner, but these days there is also the performance database for that, which I strongly suspect would have a higher weight.

One of our locals regrets not registering his points now, he got to grand master and then never bothered sending in (as you had to at the time, it's automatic now) his points for many years, then they stuck another rank on top which he still hasn't got to, having thrown away enough points to have got there several times over.

I think most people have given up trying to use masterpoint rank here as any real guide to ability. Gold points are probably better (national events in the last 5 years, degrading 20%/year) and the NGS is a guide, but nothing's perfect.

[CamHenry]

But... when you collect enough masterpoints you get a free pen!

(They usually last about a week before they break, in my experience)

[uday]

I can only address my experience in the USA ( with the ACBL ), tho I'm curious about how the "HCP" referenced by Runempard is computed.

The OP ( original poster ) asks a couple Qs -

Are masterpoints an attendance grade?
I think there is a large component of this, yes. This tends to polarize opinion. Some people feel that the ACBL needs a true rating system in addition, others don't care. I don't care, bec. my masterpoints ( or lack thereof ) only impact me in a minor way. When entering a large team event like the ACBL's Spingold, the teams are seeded, and one component of seeding is the #points your team holds ( 1 seeding point for every 1000 or some such ). The events are set up to give higher seeded teams an easier ride to the later rounds, so all else being equal, it is an advantage to have more masterpoints than fewer masterpoints. In addition, the ACBL is fond of bracketed events ( the entire field is stacked into brackets of say 16 teams ) where success in a bracket means you get credit for beating all the lower ranking brackets , hence more masterpoints. However, this feels a bit circular, and it only affects people who are easily bored (by playing weaker opps than they'd prefer to play ).


Is there merit in the system?
Absolutely, although I realize many people will disagree. Gotta keep score somehow, else what will you mull over on your deathbed? It's like playing backgammon for no money otherwise. Other systems perhaps have more merit but nothing better seems to have surfaced in real life. Masterpoints are some sort of measurement of progress, whatever that means to you. There is no need to assign earth-shaking significance to them, but wth. I made it a point to collect a bunch of them when I was younger, so I could attain the rank of 'life master' - now the subsequent ranks don't do it for me so I don't bother.

The system could stand some improvement here but it is doubtless a very difficult problem for the NBOs (national bridge organizations like ACBL, EBU) to address, based on my experience here at BBO.

[Vampyr]

uday, on 2014-February-25, 11:57, said:

In addition, the ACBL is fond of bracketed events ( the entire field is stacked into brackets of say 16 teams ) where success in a bracket means you get credit for beating all the lower ranking brackets , hence more masterpoints. However, this feels a bit circular, and it only affects people who are easily bored (by playing weaker opps than they'd prefer to play).

I played in one of these at one Nationals, and discovered that if you want a good game you can request to be put in the top bracket. I don't know how this works if everyone does it, though.

[RunemPard]

Sorry Uday, I just cannot find the link and have been looking forever now. It is based off a lot of things though such as pairs/boards, avg hcp, your hcp, and I am pretty sure the better the players are in a tournament the more/less it affects. If you look at a high level national event though, you will see players HCP change more with far less drastic results.

[hautbois]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-25, 12:15, said:

I played in one of these at one Nationals, and discovered that if you want a good game you can request to be put in the top bracket. I don't know how this works if everyone does it, though.

Generally they will allow it in the ACBL so long as a team that should be in the top bracket is not forced down and the team requesting are earnest and able to compete at that level. It can be awkward if 18 teams enter.

[aguahombre]

hautbois, on 2014-March-02, 19:50, said:

Generally they will allow it in the ACBL so long as a team that should be in the top bracket is not forced down and the team requesting are earnest and able to compete at that level. It can be awkward if 18 teams enter.

I don't understand this. The 16th team in the top bracket "should be" in the top bracket by the criteria established. Does someone separately decide that team is over-rated?

[hautbois]

aguahombre, on 2014-March-02, 20:16, said:

I don't understand this. The 16th team in the top bracket "should be" in the top bracket by the criteria established. Does someone separately decide that team is over-rated?

Frequently there won't be 16 teams in the top bracket so it's easy to add anyone else who would like to play up.

If 18 teams enter a bracketed KO, the brackets are best divided 9 and 9, so if one team gets elevated to the top bracket, someone else is pushed down or the brackets become 10 and 8 which is also awkward.