What % of BBO players at each # level over "10"?
#5
Posted 2024-January-08, 11:24
#6
Posted 2024-January-08, 12:06
The number does at least have some correlation with successful play, unlike the self-rank which is often arbitrary or Private (although that is almost always an honest warning of incompetence).
But also in this case @barmar has the answer.
#7
Posted 2024-January-10, 17:11
Within them, here is the breakdown.
+--------+-------+------+ | rating | count | pct | +--------+-------+------+ | 10 | 927 | 10.7 | | 11 | 795 | 9.2 | | 12 | 666 | 7.7 | | 13 | 556 | 6.4 | | 14 | 515 | 5.9 | | 15 | 435 | 5.0 | | 16 | 380 | 4.4 | | 17 | 327 | 3.8 | | 18 | 315 | 3.6 | | 19 | 252 | 2.9 | | 20 | 270 | 3.1 | | 21 | 207 | 2.4 | | 22 | 190 | 2.2 | | 23 | 180 | 2.1 | | 24 | 179 | 2.1 | | 25 | 176 | 2.0 | | 26 | 146 | 1.7 | | 27 | 136 | 1.6 | | 28 | 121 | 1.4 | | 29 | 106 | 1.2 | | 30 | 104 | 1.2 | | 31 | 95 | 1.1 | | 32 | 82 | 0.9 | | 33 | 83 | 1.0 | | 34 | 69 | 0.8 | | 35 | 73 | 0.8 | | 36 | 65 | 0.7 | | 37 | 61 | 0.7 | | 38 | 51 | 0.6 | | 39 | 47 | 0.5 | | 40 | 42 | 0.5 | | 41 | 42 | 0.5 | | 42 | 47 | 0.5 | | 43 | 44 | 0.5 | | 44 | 30 | 0.3 | | 45 | 26 | 0.3 | | 46 | 43 | 0.5 | | 47 | 27 | 0.3 | | 48 | 17 | 0.2 | | 49 | 28 | 0.3 | | 50 | 34 | 0.4 | | 51 | 21 | 0.2 | | 52 | 16 | 0.2 | | 53 | 19 | 0.2 | | 54 | 15 | 0.2 | | 55 | 21 | 0.2 | | 56 | 25 | 0.3 | | 57 | 14 | 0.2 | | 58 | 15 | 0.2 | | 59 | 16 | 0.2 | | 60 | 13 | 0.1 | | 61 | 17 | 0.2 | | 62 | 14 | 0.2 | | 63 | 10 | 0.1 | | 64 | 14 | 0.2 | | 65 | 13 | 0.1 | | 66 | 14 | 0.2 | | 67 | 16 | 0.2 | | 68 | 14 | 0.2 | | 69 | 7 | 0.1 | | 70 | 14 | 0.2 | | 71 | 8 | 0.1 | | 72 | 12 | 0.1 | | 73 | 8 | 0.1 | | 74 | 9 | 0.1 | | 75 | 9 | 0.1 | | 76 | 9 | 0.1 | | 77 | 4 | 0.0 | | 78 | 10 | 0.1 | | 79 | 4 | 0.0 | | 80 | 3 | 0.0 | | 81 | 5 | 0.1 | | 82 | 9 | 0.1 | | 83 | 4 | 0.0 | | 84 | 8 | 0.1 | | 85 | 5 | 0.1 | | 86 | 4 | 0.0 | | 87 | 4 | 0.0 | | 88 | 2 | 0.0 | | 89 | 6 | 0.1 | | J | 150 | 1.7 | | Q | 70 | 0.8 | | K | 29 | 0.3 | | A | 1 | 0.0 | +--------+-------+------+
#8
Posted 2024-January-10, 19:11
It would be interesting to see how much the JQKA players play to maintain their position. Do the rating points have a lifetime?
(still learning)
"At last: just calm down, this kind of disrupted boards happens every day in our bridge community. It will always be an inherent part of bridge until we move to a modern platform, and then will we have other hopefully less frequent issues." P Swennson
#9
Posted 2024-January-10, 19:54
jillybean, on 2024-January-10, 19:11, said:
That's because they're different definitions entirely - numbers are a scale based on the number of points, while JQKA are rankings based on the 250 players with the most points (so always add to 250).
If the letters were dropped, the numbers would continue to flatten.. e.g. Leo was over 300 four years ago which is a long way from 89
#10
Posted 2024-January-11, 05:12
It seems rather pointless to group the top 250 players like that. Are these awards are for "successful play" in pay tournaments, with human partners or bots. or both?
Another ego driven waste of time imo
(still learning)
"At last: just calm down, this kind of disrupted boards happens every day in our bridge community. It will always be an inherent part of bridge until we move to a modern platform, and then will we have other hopefully less frequent issues." P Swennson
#12
Posted 2024-January-11, 16:24
As I am nowhere near 86% of an elite, this prompts me to think that this is another number with little relevance to skill against humans or human+robot.
#13
Posted 2024-January-11, 17:02
pescetom, on 2024-January-11, 16:24, said:
As I am nowhere near 86% of an elite, this prompts me to think that this is another number with little relevance to skill against humans or human+robot.
The player with the highest BBOMP rating is a specialist in robot play and pioneered many of the exploitation techniques that have become widely adopted. I do not know him personally but from the comments of those that do know him he appears to be a good but not expert level player in all human play.
#14
Posted 2024-January-11, 17:38
Gilithin, on 2024-January-11, 17:02, said:
The two of you aren't talking about the same person. Pescetom put his parenthetical comment in an unfortunate place.
#15
Posted 2024-January-12, 10:20
sfi, on 2024-January-11, 17:38, said:
Yes, it did not help in parsing the sentence, sorry. I meant the highest of those I actually know through frequent play and discussion, not the highest I know of or the one I know is the highest
Not that I am sure that 'BBOMP rating' is the same thing as 'Award Symbol' or whatever barmar is listing as 'rating number' (and not that I care, I ignore these things and the various stars and purples too).
#16
Posted 2024-January-17, 18:29
shyams, on 2024-January-11, 06:20, said:
For example, my "rank" is almost entirely due to past play in paid Robot tournaments.
Me, too. Since I work for BBO, I play for free. So for the last 12 years I've been playing enormous numbers of robot games. As a result I'm an 85 on BBO and an ACBL Emerald Life Master. My results at national tournaments don't match the expectations of someone with 8200 masterpoints. The way I'm going, I may become a Platinum LM in a few years without ever scratching in an unlimited national event (I did come in 2nd in the Mini-Blue Ribbon a few years ago, so I'm not totally hopeless).