[blackshoe]

peachy, on Jun 6 2008, 02:57 AM, said:

Rules that are un-enforceable, tend to erode respect for that rule and possibly other rules as well.

I would have said "almost inevitably" rather than "possibly".

[olegru]

peachy, on Jun 6 2008, 02:57 AM, said:

With very few exceptions, people DO NOT need a cell phone while playing and the dependancy on the phone is largely illusory.

Of cause absence of cell phone during the session is not an issue. Point is - a lot of people do not stay in the host hotel. For example during the San Francisco national I stayed in San Bruno (~1 hour trip). Cell phone ban would give me a choice to be without phone all day long or to lose time before session to give my phone; to lose time after the session tio receive it back; take a risk that they lose my phone and someone will have access to private information stored there and on top of everything to pay them for keeping my phone. None of these choises are acceptable for me.
Real choises are: stay in the host hotel or ignore national.

[hrothgar]

Here's the letter that I fired off to the Bridge World (more recently to Jay Baum)

Dear Mr. Baum

I am writing regarding the new Electronic Device Policy that the ACBL introduced in Detroit. While I applaud the ACBL for considering the security challenges posed by electronic communications system, I believe that policy that they chose to implement is badly flawed. If the ACBL is serious about security they should start by implementing policies that would prevent players from benefiting from a covert communications channel. To start with, the ACBL should join the 20th century and start using dealing machines in major events. This simple measure would simultaneously benefit players while making it much more difficult to cheat. (Widespread use of dealing machine machines would permit boards to be played simultaneously. In turn, this would force cheaters to operate in "real time" - no more exchanging text messages between bathroom stalls). In a similar vein, the ACBL should require that Vugraph feeds implement a fixed 15 or 20 minute time delay. Instead of implementing these types of simple practical measures, the ACBL has created a highly visible/highly intrusive system that will dramatically inconvenience participants while yielding little, if any, improvement in event security. The ACBL policy is all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Its very difficult to implement regulatory structures that individuals find inconvenient. Implementing unpopular policies requires

1. Convincing the public that there is a clear threat
2. Convincing the public that the "cure" will actually be effective
3. Convincing the public that there are no better options

The ACBL's Electronic Device Policy has failed on all three counts. The organization has created a regulation that most players will willfully ignore. Players will power off their cell phones during events. The smart ones will pop out the battery packs. But most players will ignore this rule, just like they ignore the convention card regulations and anything else that seems inconvenient.

I would argue that its better to pass no law than to implement a regulation that fosters disrespect for the legal system as a whole...

regards,

Richard Willey
(who doesn't even own a cell phone)

[jtfanclub]

mike777, on Jun 5 2008, 11:37 PM, said:

For sake of discussion let's assume cell phones are not needed for many, almost all members, it is a luxury a huge luxury. This changes the tone of the discussion 100%.

I can only add that for almost 30 years in practice in fact almost 50 years of actual investing I have been told by my fellow stockbrockers that they must, must be reachable by phone at almost all times. I always thought this was a very silly thing. In fact I practiced just the opposite. I always assumed if I dropped dead I had prepared my staff, clients and a replacement while I was on vacation or worse.

Try being the only computer technician for a company with 25 branches. You do not want to be out of contact for 24 hours.

But I mean, screw work. How long to you want to wait to know that li'l Mikey found a cigarette lighter, your house is gone, the babysitter's in critical condition, and junior's going into surgery?

[TimG]

jtfanclub, on Jun 6 2008, 09:39 AM, said:

But I mean, screw work. How long to you want to wait to know that li'l Mikey found a cigarette lighter, your house is gone, the babysitter's in critical condition, and junior's going into surgery?

Three things:

1) A cell phone may be the most convenient way to contact someone at a bridge tournament, but it is not the only way. When my in-laws go on a trip, they provide us with an itinerary complete with hotel phone numbers despite the fact that they carry cell phones. It may take a little more effort without a cell phone on your person 24/7, but it's not nearly the impossibility that many imagine.

2) Even before the ban, cell phones were supposed to be turned off in the playing area. Do you really leave the playing area during every break so you can turn your phone on and check to see whether your house has burned down?

3) Given your scenario, I don't mind waiting until the end of the session. Or, until a hotel employee finds me if my family feels it is imperative that I know sooner.

[jtfanclub]

TimG, on Jun 6 2008, 09:52 AM, said:

3) Given your scenario, I don't mind waiting until the end of the session. Or, until a hotel employee finds me if my family feels it is imperative that I know sooner.

The issue is not, for me, having the phone off for a session. That's already the rule.

It's the idea that the ACBL takes no responsibility for the return of my phone.

If I couldn't go an hour or two without my phone being on, I couldn't play bridge anyways. Losing my phone permanently would be on the order of losing my wallet, at least when I'm away from phone.

[hrothgar]

For what its worth, I received the following repy

Quote

Richard:
Thank you for your note regarding the cell phone policy.You have made some excellent points and I will share them with our Chief Tournament Director.You make an assumption that this policy is unpopular.As of today ,that is not the case.We have been asked for over a year to adopt the same policy as the US Chess Federation and the World Bridge Federation.The opposition to the policy has been , surprisingly , very little.
While you do make some very good observations about dealing machines , understand anything is possible with money.We try to hold the cost at a minimum for members and players.Barometer style games are labor intensive and would make the cost of participation rise considerably.We have contemplated this and other fixes that may become part of out process in the future.
Your premise about disrespect could build a case to eliminate speed limits. Our intent is to take away an annoyance to many and eliminate a chance to gain unfair advantage.
I do appreciate the feed back.
Kindest regards,

Jay Baum, CEO
ACBL

[mycroft]

I understand the "3.5 hours is fine, 10 (14 if you play Mornings) is not" people - especially because the same people who live and die by their cell phones are also the people who don't have the disposable income to stay at the host hotel, so going back for their cell phone after the session is a non-starter.

I think the explanation that this is only for NABC+ Championship events is somewhat ingenious, given the published opinion of at least one of the BoD: "If implementation of the new policy goes well, I expect that it will be extended to regionally-rated events in 2009." (from http://www3.sympatic.../board081.html).

However, as I am someone who has to carry a @#$*ing Leash around with me (Sorry, guys, for the obscenity, but that's what they're called) once a month or so, and sees no reason why I should be Leashed the rest of the time, it's not going to affect me. And I'm not "young" any more, but I'm not 40 either.

[pclayton]

Perhaps my biggest fear is if I chose to carry a phone (thus violating the ban) and someone saw it, there would be a de facto assumption of cheating.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Jun 6 2008, 12:09 PM, said:

Perhaps my biggest fear is if I chose to carry a phone (thus violating the ban) and someone saw it, there would be a de facto assumption of cheating.

Overcoming this fear should be easy, just don't violate the ban.

[olegru]

TimG, on Jun 6 2008, 12:17 PM, said:

Overcoming this fear should be easy, just don't violate the ban.

Thanks for useful advice.
Could I use your phone between sessions during the Las Vegas national?

[jdonn]

hrothgar, on Jun 6 2008, 10:59 AM, said:

For what its worth, I received the following repy

Quote

Richard:
Thank you for your note regarding the cell phone policy.You have made some excellent points and I will share them with our Chief Tournament Director.You make an assumption that this policy is unpopular.As of today ,that is not the case.We have been asked for over a year to adopt the same policy as the US Chess Federation and the World Bridge Federation.The opposition to the policy has been , surprisingly , very little.
While you do make some very good observations about dealing machines , understand anything is possible with money.We try to hold the cost at a minimum for members and players.Barometer style games are labor intensive and would make the cost of participation rise considerably.We have contemplated this and other fixes that may become part of out process in the future.
Your premise about disrespect could build a case to eliminate speed limits. Our intent is to take away an annoyance to many and eliminate a chance to gain unfair advantage.
I do appreciate the feed back.
Kindest regards,

Jay Baum, CEO
ACBL

Richard, fwiw I have been informed previously that the real reason barometer play will not happen is simply because of the vast amount of labor and amount of actual boards that it would require, not to mention storage space. While money is always a reason, I don't believe that is what's preventing it.

[Apollo81]

Elianna, on Jun 5 2008, 11:47 PM, said:

Funnily enough, whenever a cell phone goes off around me (tournament, club game, etc...) it always belongs to some elderly person who always claims that he forgot that the cell phone was in his possession.

My favorite instance of this was playing at the local unit game (50ish tables) where an old guy's phone rang loudly and he answered it. The conversation (heard by everyone in the room) went like this:

old guy: HELLO? WHAT? I can't talk, I'm playing bridge. <further conversation I can't remember>

At least the director slapped him with a penalty for this.

[hrothgar]

jdonn, on Jun 6 2008, 09:11 PM, said:

Richard, fwiw I have been informed previously that the real reason barometer play will not happen is simply because of the vast amount of labor and amount of actual boards that it would require, not to mention storage space. While money is always a reason, I don't believe that is what's preventing it.

Hi Josh

Thanks for the clarification:

One quick comment: Run properly, barometers don't require all that many more board than a "normal" game. Most barometers that I have played in recycle boards throughout the game.

While we're playing round 2, the Directors are dealing the boards for round 4... I'd guess that the total number of boards required increases by a factor of three, but its not crippling.

It's probably not a coincidence, but most of these barometers also used cloth boards rather than the traditional metal/plastic ones.

I'm guessing that experience, organizational competance, and "Not Invented Here"
are the main culprits.

[blackshoe]

hrothgar, on Jun 6 2008, 01:44 PM, said:

I'm guessing that experience, organizational competance, and "Not Invented Here" are the main culprits.

Wouldn't surprise me any.

My impression, from posts I've read in various places, is that in Scandinavia, in particular, barometers are the norm at all levels, including clubs. Granted the ACBL is bigger than Scandinavia, both geographically and in terms of number of bridge players, still one would think that if they can do it....

[Elianna]

My letter:
Dear Mr. Baum,

I wanted to write to tell you how worried I am about the upcoming cell phone ban.

I go to bridge nationals because I enjoy playing in a high level competition, and to see my bridge playing friends. But now with this upcoming ban, my choices seem to be:
1) Don't play in any national event
2) Not to be able to make plans in between sessions
3) Pay money for someone who MIGHT even keep my phone secure, just for the privilege of waiting in line to get it back after each session.

I also am concerned about how this ban will be employed. Are we to submit our persons for searches in order to play in NABC+ events?

I feel that this new rule is being implemented because there is a "suggestion" that people can use cell phones to cheat. However, there are many easier ways to cheat, especially in events that do not employ screens. It seems extremely ineffectual to ban cell phones in events that do not have screens (such as first rounds of the spingold, or the LM pairs), almost like having a high-tech alarm system on the back door, when the front door is missing.

Sincerely,
Elianna Ruppin

The response I received:

Dear Elianna:
Thank you for your note.The ban on cell phones will take some adjustment by those that choose to play in North American Championships.The decision to do this was done for the protection of the game and the enjoyment of the players. As with chess , golf and other sports and games organizations ,we feel this is a necessary step to insure the comfortable environment for our members and to maintain a level playing field.
We do not anticipate the need to search players.Screens will not deter use of communication devices by players or kibitzers that leave the playing area for any reason.
Our intent is to take away an annoyance to many and eliminate one of the options to gain unfair advantage.
I do appreciate you taking the time to offer your feedback on this issue.

Kindest regards,

Jay Baum, CEO
ACBL

[TimG]

He has twice mentioned that part of the reason the ban was enacted was to remove an annoyance. Even if it were true, I would not have admitted to it if I were him.

[jillybean]

Elianna, obviously Jay Baum completely missed your point regarding screens. This seems more to be driven by the ringing phone annoyance than to “protect the integrity of the game”

The ‘please turn you cell phone off’ rule is not enforced, players wont be searched so this new rule unenforceable. Is the hope to scare people into turning off their phones?

[blackshoe]

The logic is inescapable:

1. People bring their cell phones to games.
2. Sometimes those phones ring.
3. This annoys some other people.
4. We made a rule that cell phones should be turned off.
5. Everybody ignored it.
6. So we made a new rule that they must give us their cell phones when they get to the door.
7. When they ignore that, we'll make some other rule.

Conclusion: when we want to keep people from doing something, don't make a rule and then punish them for breaking it; just keep making new rules until we find one they'll obey voluntarily.

What planet are these people from?

[mike777]

It is logical that if many people break the ban the rule will simply be deleted, I agree but this seems like a simple solution, delete the rule.


I agree that for more than 50 years many people simply cannot go to tourneys as they must be accessible for work or family issues, this is nothing new. If you cannot be without contact from your job or family for 12 or 24 or 48 hours and the hotel phone cannot handle the issues involved I agree you may not be able to go to tourneys. This is nothing new for most of us.

These threads do surprise me that so many people cannot go away on vacation and have no contact with your job for even 24 hours let alone one or two weeks without the boss getting mad at you. Even my Doctors go to the literal ends of the world for a week or two with Doctors without Borders where they are unreachable. I understand if you cannot go to a tourney.

I will not even broach the subject that your family cannot agree to let you go 12 or 24 hours without the hotel phone being enough.

In any event how did this rule work or not work at the USBF trials?