Don't Rematch with Last Opponent if Either Left the Table

[Cave-O-Sapien]

This behavior has bugged me for a long time. If either player leaves the table, they shouldn't be matched immediately with the person they just played.

[WhiteRabbit1981]

I disagree.
If you dont want to play a certain person again, blacklist them. If you want to play a specific person, make a table for it.
If you click on "good match", take what you get!

just my two cents :-)

[Stef]

I stand somewhere in the middle here...

I think the problem might actually be a lack of automatch options. You left that previous table because of some reason (opponents rating too high?) that the client currently doesn't let you express. If it was truly because he's a jerk then blacklisting is indeed a perfectly adequate solution.

[Jacob Marley]

What used to happen to me before I bought my subscription was that I would get in a base only game and my opponent would quit because he wanted all expansions (not a familiar cards issue, I had already set all cards as familiar).  I'd click automatch again and get the same player who would immediately quit again.  Obviously once I got my subscription this was no longer an issue, but I think that this experience supports the OP's position.  Probably the automatch system should try for some period of time (say 5-10 seconds) to match you with different players then if no suitable match can be found, rematch the same players.

I also agree that for good match, at the least players should be able to select the range of levels they want to be matched against.

[gitsticker8]

Seems the ideal fix would be to put a strong temporary bias against matching to recent opponents who left.  At least that way you prioritize other players but if there simply are none, you will get re-matched.

[Cave-O-Sapien]

I stand somewhere in the middle here...

I think the problem might actually be a lack of automatch options. You left that previous table because of some reason (opponents rating too high?) that the client currently doesn't let you express. If it was truly because he's a jerk then blacklisting is indeed a perfectly adequate solution.

Yes, I think this is generally accurate. I don't see the blacklist as a means of "curating" a list of opponents according to my preferences. For me it's a tool to handle abusive players and that's all.

Right now you have the option after each game of deciding (for whatever reason) whether or not to play another game against your current opponent. If you leave the table, you have decided not to play them again. When you get matched with them again anyway, it feels like your decision has been overruled.

A "rematching penalty", as has been suggested, seems like a decent approach that would keep most of the current functionality.

Another approach is to always kick players back to the matching pool after each match. This removes the rematch decision entirely. While some people may not like this approach, because they want immediate "revenge" or whatever, it would also address the perception that players are "too scared" or "un-chivalrous" to allow a rematch.

[markus]

Rematch should definitely be allowed. I'm happy to play again, once I've found a nice opponent.

If I leave the table and search again, I'd obviously rather have someone new even if I don't blacklist the old opponent. Having more options to define an "equal opponent" would already help.

[gitsticker8]

This is getting a little off topic.  We're not talking about the rematch functionality but rather the matching system's persistence in matching you to the same person over and over (if I'm understanding correctly).  IE - find game > resign > find game > same person, resign > find game > same person, resign... etc