[blml] Disclosure f2f

[raija]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Geller" <geller at nifty.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Disclosure f2f


>
>>> >*** What aspect of F2F is necessary for improving?
>>> >
>>> >Raija
>>>
>>> Playing against strong players under supervised conditions.
>>
>>All right, Bob, I'll ask the obvious question. Why supervised
>>conditions? You'll find more than enough strong players online, are
>>you really suggesting that they'll all cheat if there's no supervision?
>
> You'll find strong players playing practice matches online.
> Obviously there's little or no incentive to resort to
> less than fully ethical tactics in a practice match.
> But you won't find any serious tourneys involving major
> competitions being played online (for obvious reasons).
> (There are of course oneline vugraph broadcasts of major f2f events,
> but that's a separate matter.).
>
> I don't play online myself, but from reading electronic bulletin boards,
> cheating by low level players seems to be a major concern.
> The authorities seem to be doing the best they can to police it
> using hand records.  But until this problem can be solved (if
> it ever can) it's
> unlikely any country or zone will hold a national or zonal
> championship online.   If you know of any that have been
> held please let me know.
>
> Ordinary players are unlikely to be invited to practice against
> Meckwell or the like in their online exhibition matches.
> If you want to play Meckwell, pay your 20 bucks or whatever
> and enter an f2f event they'll be playing in.
>
> In order to really bring out one's best, a competition
> has to be for somethng meaningful.  Like honor (a national
> or zonal or world championship), money (cash prizes),
> or at least an ersatz substitute like masterpoints.  If
> online competitions involved one or more of these then
> the competitors would be just as serious as they are
> in major f2f events.  But in the absence of one or
> more of these motivators, it's just a pleasant way to spend time.
> I'm not saying it's without value in improving one's game,
> but it's the difference between an exhibition game in baseball,
> or an NFL preseason game or a friendly match in soccer versus
> a competition that counts in the league standings.
>
> -Bob

I think you completely miss the point of my question, which was "What aspect 
of F2F is necessary for improving?"   You mentioned supervision, money, 
masterpoints, and national honors.

There are plenty of fine players who have an intrinsic motivation to excel 
and learn, with or without a paid or unpaid tutor, and who love the game and 
its neverending complexities.  They already have the motivation from within 
and thus do not need money, masterpoints, or national honors as motivators. 
Supervised play is easier to arrange online than F2F.

Online offers automatedly some functions that are very tedious for a teacher 
or learning buddy to perform F2F and with real cards, such as practice 
deals, practice tables, recording of all plays for later review and study 
(with or without teacher/mentor), hand records, etc.

For someone who has not played online, you have strong opinions:)

Cheers,
Raija