[frank0]

The Group RR stage is done. Please go to the KO thread to report the KO score.


http://www.bridgebas...ent-6-ko-stage/

All the unfinished match at deadline will be assigned 25%:25% if both players are responsible, 0%:(60% or 100%-that player's average) if one player is responsible. Players who are responsible for unfinished matches without notifying the public will be banned from playing next two events. (Any player who 1. is reported inactive by many players 2. has extremely slow progress toward finishing the matched will be considered responsible for unfinished matches.)

Group 1: stephen tu, nige1, mkgnao, hrothgar, barmar, ant590, jordanova, icycookie, gwnn , pio_magic, prasanna
Group 2: olegru, broze, stoppiello, m1cha, cherdano, herzas, veryfy, bobhew32, sep123, Elyk25, tonywuhk
Group 3: dadim, phil, toast1, jeffford76, ye17, nekthen, sieong, samboone, zzmiy, zenoo, xbabarx
Group 4: ovncylmz, diana_eva, el mister, gordontd, frank0, gerardo, phoenix214, kfitz, gqc6, crazy4hoop, karappe
Group 5: sfi, smerriman, chuck11, wackojack, jexa_, brigimon, kubiresmo, the it, geoffff, jkr_1993, eblenner

Top 6 of each group and 2 highest MP 7th place advance to R32 KO (seeding: group rank first, then MP).

Tie breaker within the same group: First by overall MP vs. players with identical MP, then by result vs. rank 1 among "others", rank 2 among "others", etc. (Actual rank first, then seeding when there is a tie not yet break). In the case of multiple set of ties, highest MP tie will be broken first. In the case two or more players tie and have identical scores vs. all others (very very unlikely) I'll announce the play-off rule.

Example: Suppose a group end up in 59, 59, 54, 54, 54, 50, 47, 47, 44, 42, 40. First we determine the rank of 59% player by the match bet. them, if that is a tie (i.e. 5:5), then we determine the result by their score vs. highest seed 54% player, if still tie, then we determine the result by their score vs. second highest seed 54% player, etc.

Now the rank of 59% players is set. For 54% players, first determine by the MP total vs. two other 54% players, then by their result vs. rank 1 59% (not necessarily top seed!), then by rank 2 59% player, then by their result vs. 50% player, then by higher seed 47% player, etc.

Now rank of both 59%, 54% players are set. Tie breaker of 47% players are similar to tie breaker of 54% players.

Tie breaker for different group, same rank, same MP: This comes after the group rank is determining without tie. First by result vs. group champ., then by result vs. group 2nd, etc.

Score
https://www.dropbox....t%206.xlsx?dl=0
Rule
https://www.dropbox....t%206.docx?dl=0

This event will be BAM(MP), non-best hand, and similar tournament structure as past few events.

How group is assigned (don't need to read, just for your information)
Players are seeded first by seeding point (masterpoint from event 5+0.9*masterpoint from event 4+0.8*masterpoint from event 3+......), then by random number. Each group contains exactly 1 player from seed 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, ......, 51-55.
Master point information https://www.dropbox....ystem.xlsx?dl=0

[gordontd]

I promise not to go to Cuba during this one!

[smerriman]

Still no idea what the strategy is in BAM, but I'll play anyway.

[stoppiello]

I'm in and I think it is just simply better score on the hand wins a point, most points after a set wins

[chuck11]

I'm in, every tournament needs some fodder for the good players to warm up on.

[hrothgar]

Count me in

[frank0]

It's the first time there are that many entrants. I'm considering group stage only cut down to 32 for KO, if number of entrants exceeds 48.

[ShirleyMqz]

smerriman, on 2017-January-07, 17:30, said:

Still no idea what the strategy is in BAM, but I'll play anyway.

BAM is like matchpoints except even more so. There is never a dull moment. Every hand matters equally, making it the most gruelling form of bridge competition. But it's also the best form of bridge competition in its way; the best players nearly ALWAYS rise to the top.

All you care about is beating the score at the other table. There is no protection provided by the field; you either win, lose, or tie. How much you win or lose the board by is irrelevant. You can win a board by getting an extra overtrick (by clever play or by right-siding it during the auction), or by playing in notrump instead of a major suit if they get the same number of tricks, or playing in the suit rather than notrump if it gets an extra trick.

[smerriman]

ShirleyMqz, on 2017-January-09, 20:59, said:

BAM is like matchpoints except even more so. There is never a dull moment. Every hand matters equally, making it the most gruelling form of bridge competition. But it's also the best form of bridge competition in its way; the best players nearly ALWAYS rise to the top.

All you care about is beating the score at the other table. There is no protection provided by the field; you either win, lose, or tie. How much you win or lose the board by is irrelevant. You can win a board by getting an extra overtrick (by clever play or by right-siding it during the auction), or by playing in notrump instead of a major suit if they get the same number of tricks, or playing in the suit rather than notrump if it gets an extra trick.

Sorry, I didn't mean I didn't understand how BAM worked, but the way people bid with the robots - see here. Given a large amount of the time the other contract isn't what you're expecting, the correct line of play in your own contract becomes rather random.

[broze]

smerriman, on 2017-January-09, 21:20, said:

Sorry, I didn't mean I didn't understand how BAM worked, but the way people bid with the robots - see here. Given a large amount of the time the other contract isn't what you're expecting, the correct line of play in your own contract becomes rather random.

I don't undertand the point you are making. Surely playing with the robots it is actually easier to predict the contract at the other table than in real life since there is only one variable not two? In real life you can't rely in people bidding how you expect either.

[frank0]

OK this is the end of the registration. We have 55 entrants total, please stop voting in this thread. The format will be announced soon.

[sfi]

Quick note to the rest of group 5. I'll have more time starting next weekend, so will play my matches in the second week. If that causes problems for anyone, send me a message.

[frank0]

A message from ovncylmz, he is currently busy in job interview and will play later.

[cherdano]

Will we again get advanced bots for those?

[cherdano]

Will we again get advanced bots for those?

[barmar]

If anyone already created challenges between players who are both on the following list before the time of this post, you should cancel them and do it again. I just added these users to the list who get advanced bots in friend challenges.

ant590
bobhew32
cherdano
crazy4hoop
eblenner
Elyk25
geoffff
gerardo
gwnn
herzas
jkr_1993
jordanova
karappe
kfitz
kubiresmo
phoenix214
pio_magic
prasanna
samboone
sieong
the it
tonywuhk
veryfy
xbabarx
zenoo
zzmiy

This only apples if both players are on the list. When creating a challenge, you get advanced bots if either the challenger or challengee has the advanced bot option, so those challenges don't need to be recreated.

[diana_eva]

Yes, hold on with issuing challenges for a bit please. Checking the list of participants now, and we'll upgrade robots for the new people.

Everyone who had advanced robots before still has them. If a challenge is between user with adv bots and user without, the challenge will have advanced robots.

Edit: nvm, Barry beat me to it

This post has been edited by diana_eva: 2017-January-14, 12:17

[zzmiy]

Ye17 : ZZmiy
3.5 : 6.5

http://webutil.bridg...aeb4-1484410971

It was created before the post, but as opponent is not on that list I hope there's no need to replay?

[cherdano]

I already started playing my challenge against tonywuhk (finished 5 boards). Should we start over?

[barmar]

cherdano, on 2017-January-14, 13:39, said:

I already started playing my challenge against tonywuhk (finished 5 boards). Should we start over?

Yes.