[whereagles]

Phil, on 2011-June-03, 09:27, said:

In spite of my bitching, I thought this was a great job by Han.

It's better than a great job Han took a lot of time and trouble making this poll exactly the way it's done in professional magazines. Well done! If this standard is kept, soon enough stuff can be bundled up and published. I'm not kidding!

There's just one thing I'd do otherwise: everybody who enters the poll should have his score published. People should not be afraid to be exposed, nor should (in my opinion) the organizer be afraid to expose people. No guts, no glory!

[JLOGIC]

No reason to publicize peoples scores who did badly, it would just serve to embarrass them and maybe stop some people from entering in the first place. I'm all for positive reinforcement for those who are among the top scorers, and that's it. Then people will want to send in their answers.

That said if Han wanted to publicize all of the panelists scores that would be fine. Most magazines show all panelists scores, and the top scorers of people who sent in answers. However, as Han pointed out, the panelists scores are pretty meaningless since we are not trying to maximize our score. I think it is just something that is fun to look at, for instance I like seeing when Meck gets a 10 or whatever in "You Be The Judge" just because its funny.

[AlexJonson]

I'd say definitely publish all the scores (full matrix). Why not?

Don't be condescending. Players may still prefer their own solution, after all, by definition actual champions are in a minority.

Don't assume anyone will be embarassed

[whereagles]

justin, all the bids in these polls are judgement bids. "Doing bad" is a matter of taste. I myself couldnn't care less whether I scored 100 or 0. Actually I'm used to be the odd guy

[Mbodell]

AlexJonson, on 2011-June-06, 15:06, said:

I'd say definitely publish all the scores (full matrix). Why not?

Don't be condescending. Players may still prefer their own solution, after all, by definition actual champions are in a minority.

Don't assume anyone will be embarassed

I also vote for the full matrix. It may be interesting to see if there is wide divergence on some hand from the panel and the non-panel. I don't think any of us would be embarrassed about our scores or bids (even if I'm one of the few people to overbid 4♠ on hand 5 it isn't that embarrassing).

[Foxx]

In Pavlicek's old online bidding polls, he would always publish all entrant scores that were above average, and only those scores. Following this, along with publishing all the panelist scores, is a good combination IMHO.

[Free]

It's all fine the way it is at the moment imo. If I could make 1 suggestion, it would be to post the history of the hand. I know 1 hand doesn't prove anything, but I enjoy seeing if the panel would get a good result on the hand in question. This is something I miss a lot in the MSC, because you know the problem isn't composed, someone picked up that hand and had a problem. What did he do?