[Aberlour10]

JanM, on May 19 2006, 11:35 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure that different spectators want different things in a broadcast. Some would like to be "entertained" by information about the players interchange between the commentators, that sort of things. Others would like more technical information about the bidding systems. Some would rather no commentary at all. Some want the operator to report on body language, feel of the room, etc. Others just want a "machine" that reports the bids and plays.

A fine weighted balance between these factors in vu-commentary makes for an "intermediate + " player like me a perfect vugraph show. I look always for the tables that are not "overloaded" with the long discussion about very complex bidding structures, where the commentators compactly pointing out the auction, declarer play and defense. I know, its only a single view, the expert players would have other expectations during the watching.

Robert

[Walddk]

Excellent points, Robert. Let's face it: you can't please all of 200, 500 or 1,000 spectators no matter how hard you try. I have no way of knowing (no statistics), but my estimate is that 70+ percent of vugraph spectators are intermediates/advanced.

Much of the commentary with accurate and complex analysis is no doubt way over their heads. On the other hand, many experts and better players would find it boring if we explained every little detail.

Debbie Rosenberg is arguably the best to make a vugraph presentation very interesting for the intermediate and advanced player, because she is so good at explaining why one should bid this and not anything else with that particular hand. She is also great when it comes to explaining why declarer did that and how the defence had an almost impossible task of beating a contract that could have been defeated.

I my view, Debbie is the ideal commentator. She knows how to serve all skill levels in the best possible way. Unfortunately she has very little time for this and only rarely does she sign up for a session.

We should all aim at getting better and find the balance between being educational, analytical and entertaining. It's not an easy job, but I know how the audience appreciates it when we manage to be a little of everything.

It would be nice to hear from more intermediate and advanced players in order to get an impression of how they would like the commentary. As David Greenwood (goose) pointed out: this is not supposed to be an ego trip for the commentator. They are there to serve the spectators with useful information!

Roland

[sallyally]

Quote

Debbie Rosenberg is arguably the best to make a vugraph presentation very interesting for the intermediate and advanced player, because she is so good at explaining why one should bid this and not anything else with that particular hand. She is also great when it comes to explaining why declarer did that and how the defence had an almost impossible task of beating a contract that could have been defeated

I couldn't agree more. Whatever room Debbie is in - thats for me!

[hrothgar]

I'm probably in the minority here, however, for me one of the main attractions of Vugraph is getting the opportunity to see how various "odd" bidding systems work in real life. Its all fine and dandy to run simulations or create theories regarding how method XYZ "should" work. I find it much more interesting to watch things "live".

Accordingly, I really like watching F+N and trying to figure out how they can land on their feat after their 2M openings. I also like watching the latest contortions from the strong club relay pairs.

[JanM]

mike777, on May 19 2006, 01:40 PM, said:

As a side note I really think we all or at least we oldie, not techy players are going to be shocked with the tech advances coming in the next few years. Full Hologram vugraphs in our living rooms may be a bit down the road but I expect huge shocking improvements in our home computer screens in the near future.

Perhaps Ms. Martel can give us some insights into this brave new viewing world?

I wish I could! I've heard a bunch of speculation. One of the interesting thoughts was that the cards could have some sort of coding in them and the table could sense that, so instead of the poor Vugraph operator having to struggle to see the cards as they're played, sometimes very fast, we'd have a guaranteed record of exactly which card was played when; I have no idea how realistic this might be - I doubt it's coming in the near future!
The internet has already enormously changed the way we watch bridge. Now, when I'm watching a Vugraph match and wonder about the meaning of a bid, I often go to Anna Gudge's site and find the pair's most recent WBF card to see what it says - ten years ago, that wouldn't have been possible. When I was operating at the Cavendish last week, and wasn't sure which player was which of a pair, some helpful spectators pointed me to pictures on the web! It's wonderful what we can do with the help of technology.
I'm hoping we'll be able to make that sort of thing easier for this summer's USBC, with easy to find links to pictures, convention cards, biographies of the players, that sort of thing. But if there's one thing I already knew and that has been reinforced by so many of the comments here, the most important part of any Vugraph presentation (once we have the software and internet access available) is the people - the generous volunteer operators and commentators without whom we wouldn't be able to do it. We owe a huge debt to all of them!

[mrdct]

hrothgar, on May 19 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

I'm probably in the minority here, however, for me one of the main attractions of Vugraph is getting the opportunity to see how various "odd" bidding systems work in real life.

I don't think you are in the minority Richard. On the limited studies that I've done where viewers have a choice between watching a table with highly artlificial methods and watching a table with mainly natural methods, the majority of the total kibitzers will generally be found at the table with the unusual methods.

My theory is that unless you are one of the lucky few that live in one of the few jurisdictions where such methods are permitted, vugraph is about the only chance you'll get to see new and exciting methods. The caveat is, however, you really need at least one commentator who is reasonably familiar with the artificial system but this is rarely a problem.

[Walddk]

I think it's great to see odd systems on vugraph, but I also know commentators who refuse to be there if they don't understand what's going on. Each to his own; we usually get around that pretty easily.

However, I do think it's important that commentators have convention cards to look at. That happens very rarely in most events and that's a shame.

Roland

[hrothgar]

JanM, on May 20 2006, 12:57 AM, said:

I wish I could! I've heard a bunch of speculation. One of the interesting thoughts was that the cards could have some sort of coding in them and the table could sense that, so instead of the poor Vugraph operator having to struggle to see the cards as they're played, sometimes very fast, we'd have a guaranteed record of exactly which card was played when; I have no idea how realistic this might be - I doubt it's coming in the near future!

This technology is already available

Many casinos are building RFID tags into both Blackjack decks and chips. The also build a tag reader into the table proper. In turn, this permits the casino to keep perfect track of the count of the deck and correlate this with the betting patterns of individual players. (Counting is going to get a lot more difficult)

As a side benefit, this also makes it almost impossible for dealers to steal chips...

It would be relatively easy to adopt this technology for bridge.
It would also be quite expensive. Also, given that the readers are being integrated into a tabletop, portability is going to be an issue.

I still argue that the electronic playing environment offers a lot more bang for the buck.

[mike777]

From what I understand RFID is going to be the next big privacy issue in the world and sooner than many of us think.

As a side note, I saw on a tv show where the police can turn on your cell phone remotely and therefore track you. Is this fantasy or do they have the tech to turn on our phones now?

[qing]

In terms of raising the standards of commentating, I'm wondering perhaps having a voting system would be helpful.
I think there are many potential good commentators out there but maybe they don't have a chance to prove themselves or try: after all to succeed in such a task, the skill is just part, maybe a small part, so there might be marginal experts but with good personality, sense of humor, etc, who can entertain the crowds better.

With a voting system and hence chances to try more samples, maybe this can increase the pool and the natural selection process will leave only the best.

The results of such votes may not need to be viewable by public, but feedback should be accessible to individual commentators. The data may start to make sense over a long period. And perhaps Roland can use the data to better select the commentators. And for events that simply have no commentators, new faces can be tried rather safely.

The voting system might run the risk of de-motivating some commentators. But speaking of myself, I wouldn't: I'm donating my time completely for entertaining the crowds -- with wife and kids shouting at background, usually -- if the crowds now tell me I suck I'd rather sit quiet. And again, if the crowds enjoy my service, I'd do it more often. So at least for me, or persons of similar mentality, this should encourage on the positive direction.

Just my $.02.

[hrothgar]

mike777, on May 20 2006, 02:10 AM, said:

As a side note, I saw on a tv show where the police can turn on your cell phone remotely and therefore track you. Is this fantasy or do they have the tech to turn on our phones now?

All cell phones in the US are designed such that their location can be triangulated. This service is ostensibly so that care providers can locate 911 callers.

The service is documented at http://www.hearusnow.org/wireless/whatsats...yphoneservices/

As I understand matters, it doesn't matter if the phone is "on". SO long as the phone has power, they can track the location.

[barmar]

mrdct, on May 18 2006, 09:12 PM, said:

barmar, on May 18 2006, 12:20 PM, said:

So if they decide to display the Pacific Asian tournament on Vu-Graph and not the American game, they might as well not have a Vu-Graph at all as far as I'm concerned.

It must be wonderful to live in the centre of the universe.

Sigh, I hoped no one would take that the wrong way.

I didn't mean to imply that the US is special in any way. I just don't happen to know who any of the Asian champions are, so I'm not interested in watching them. Conversely, I'd expect Asian viewers to prefer the Asian tourney to the US one, since they can root for their local favorites.

I wasn't trying to suggest that the US tourney should take precedence over the Asia Pacific one, or vice versa. I was advocating showing both, because many viewers will be interested in one but totally uninterested in the other.

[DenisO]

I've been away, without Internet connection, so rather late coming into this thread.
I think it's a great idea that Jan is canvassing opinions and I see a lot of excellent views have been offered and I'm sure she'll implement what she can.

I'd just like to reiterate that its v. important to get the essentials right first, i.e. good internet connection and experienced operators.

One important point that hasn't been mentioned is to ensure, after all the hard work that goes into a Vugraph presentation, that the broadcast is recorded or archived for posterity. Unfortunately the ACBL/USBF have sometimes fallen down here. To get it it right is just a simple matter of ensuring that, during the quarter and semi finals, each match is given a different name - it can be as simple as SF1 and SF2 but on several occasions I've had to contact Roland (who has more than enough to do) to get operators to do this - otherwise the match which finishes first get completely overwritten . Mrdct would give good advice on this aspect as he prepares a good file-naming structure for the broadcasts he organises.

[Walddk]

DenisO, on May 20 2006, 12:22 PM, said:

One important point that hasn't been mentioned is to ensure, after all the hard work that goes into a Vugraph presentation, that the broadcast is recorded or archived for posterity. Unfortunately the ACBL/USBF have sometimes fallen down here. To get it it right is just a simple matter of ensuring that, during the quarter and semi finals, each match is given a different name - it can be as simple as SF1 and SF2 but on several occasions I've had to contact Roland (who has more than enough to do) to get operators to do this - otherwise the match which finishes first get completely overwritten.

Noted a while ago, Denis, and that particular part has been added to the std. vugraph guidelines we send to all new organisers. Many do not have the revised guidelines, so from now on I am going to send them to all organisers and highlight the paragraph about marking the vugraph banners properly.

The same applies to letting both rooms be open until play has finished in the other room too. If one operator shuts down prematurely, we will lose data for our archives.

Roland

[JanM]

Walddk, on May 20 2006, 06:45 AM, said:

The same applies to letting both rooms be open until play has finished in the other room too. If one operator shuts down prematurely, we will lose data for our archives.

I thought that was no longer the situation, and that as long as each room stayed open until the last hand had been played in that room, everything would be complete. I was aware of the need to name each match differently, and we will do that - I wish it was a little easier to fix a mistake if one is made though. For security reasons, we try to wait to load the hands until just before the quarter starts, so we're doing the initial setup, which includes naming the matches, under considerable time pressure.

[mrdct]

What I do with all of my multi-table broadcasts is prepare a data input sheet for the operators with the exact information to be keyed at start-up. I find this takes a bit of pressure off the operators and helps achieve consistency with the look and feel.

At the World Youth, for example, we knew the next day's matches the night before so I would prepare the 9 data input sheets we needed the night before (3 rounds of 3 broadcast matches per round) and then I would fill in the player names by hand once the line-ups were posted. In Sydney, the line-ups were entered by the captains online so as soon as the last line-up was entered, the chief scorer would hand me a sheet of paper with all the player names and positions for that round.

Having a consistent naming structure was also helpful for commentators trying to find which table they were meant to be at.

One other thing, which is more for tournament organisers than vugraph organisers, is to have a requirement that players be seated 5 minutes before the official session time. The only tournament I know of where this is a requirement AND is enforced is the Australian Interstate Teams, but it meant that I could get all my vugraph tables started and have a wander around to make sure everything was OK well before actual play started.

[Rain]

hrothgar, on May 19 2006, 05:50 PM, said:

mike777, on May 20 2006, 02:10 AM, said:

As a side note, I saw on a tv show where the police can turn on your cell phone remotely and therefore track you. Is this fantasy or do they have the tech to turn on our phones now?

All cell phones in the US are designed such that their location can be triangulated. This service is ostensibly so that care providers can locate 911 callers.

The service is documented at http://www.hearusnow.org/wireless/whatsats...yphoneservices/

As I understand matters, it doesn't matter if the phone is "on". SO long as the phone has power, they can track the location.

Hey! I watched 24 and they need to keep the bad guys talking for at least 3 minutes or so to track the location.

And the phone can't just be switched on, power wise. Almost everyone's mobile phones are turned on at any one time. That won't help in tracking.

[hotShot]

Rain, on May 21 2006, 04:41 PM, said:

hrothgar, on May 19 2006, 05:50 PM, said:

mike777, on May 20 2006, 02:10 AM, said:

As a side note, I saw on a tv show where the police can turn on your cell phone remotely and therefore track you. Is this fantasy or do they have the tech to turn on our phones now?

All cell phones in the US are designed such that their location can be triangulated. This service is ostensibly so that care providers can locate 911 callers.

The service is documented at http://www.hearusnow.org/wireless/whatsats...yphoneservices/

As I understand matters, it doesn't matter if the phone is "on". SO long as the phone has power, they can track the location.

Hey! I watched 24 and they need to keep the bad guys talking for at least 3 minutes or so to track the location.

And the phone can't just be switched on, power wise. Almost everyone's mobile phones are turned on at any one time. That won't help in tracking.

Sorry Rain,

it can be located as long as it is booked into a net. And there is no need to talk!
But to do it, they must know your phonenumber.
And you can bet they don't need 3 minutes to get it.

[Sigi_BC84]

hrothgar, on May 20 2006, 01:50 AM, said:

As I understand matters, it doesn't matter if the phone is "on".  SO long as the phone has power, they can track the location.

If the phone is turned off, what is emitting the signal to be located (by whatever means necessary)?

There is no way to locate a cell phone if it's turned off (for all currently applicable definitions for "turned off").

Claiming the contrary is spreading urban legends and conspiracy theories.

--Sigi

[Walddk]

Sigi_BC84, on May 22 2006, 06:07 PM, said:

hrothgar, on May 20 2006, 01:50 AM, said:

As I understand matters, it doesn't matter if the phone is "on".  SO long as the phone has power, they can track the location.

If the phone is turned off, what is emitting the signal to be located (by whatever means necessary)?

There is no way to locate a cell phone if it's turned off (for all currently applicable definitions for "turned off").

Claiming the contrary is spreading urban legends and conspiracy theories.

--Sigi

I am sure you know a lot about these technical aspects (I am absolutely clueless), but excuse me for asking. How is it related to the topic: "How can Vugraph be improved"? - "realistic suggestions only, please".

Roland