Opinionated rankings from the full archive. This page filters out small samples and turns the analytics tables into useful lists: who is consistently strong, which partnerships work, which boards are worth studying, and where to start your review.
Method: player rank uses Rook Rating: a 1000 baseline, board percentile as the main skill signal, a small top-minus-bottom adjustment, and a reliability shrink so small samples do not jump the queue. Established-player lists require at least 10 events and 200 boards. Partnerships still rank by board percentile.
Formula: 1000 + ((board percentile - 50) + 0.25 × (top rate - bottom rate)) × 25 × reliability. Name aliases are still conservative, so similar names may split one real player until aliases are explicitly merged.
Consistent board-level performance across the archive. Minimum 10 events and 200 boards.
Two-person combinations that have enough shared boards to mean something. Minimum 5 events and 100 boards.
Good players who avoid disaster boards. Sorted by low bottom rate, then board percentile.
Players with a bigger mix of tops and bottoms. This is style, not necessarily strength.
Large score swings, many contracts, enough tables, and obvious 9000-point BridgeWebs artifacts filtered out.
Search a player, pair, event, or contract. Start with bottoms, then open the board and compare your result to the field.