[MFA]

I think the Bridgemate desperately needs a feature, where one could easily check all the scores of the session.

Our team in Beijing had a long, continuous struggle after the matches with correcting mistakes with the Bridgemates. Just as we had had in Pau. This is not fun. If it were possible to run through the scores at the end of the session, things would be much easier.

[MFA]

mrdct, on Oct 20 2008, 06:54 AM, said:

The obvious control is EW get penalised 3 IMP for any incorrect scores which should be a good incentive to not press "OK" unless it's right.

... and what would the incentive then be to NS to enter the correct result in the first place?

Introducing penalty points is a delicate matter. The margin in the women's final was 1 imp and in the seniors' 2 imps just to give an example. The world champions shouldn't be just the ones who are better at producing the correct running score for the public.

[mrdct]

Perhaps the Bridgemates could be reprogrammed so that NS enter the result and click OK and then hand the unit to EW who enter the result and click OK. The score will only validate (and update itself on a live scores website where applicable) if NS & EW enter exactly the same contact, declarer and tricks. If EW enter something different, the result is cleared and the unit goes back to NS to try again.

[cherdano]

mrdct, on Oct 20 2008, 05:54 AM, said:

If we are going to rely on these things for accurate live scoring, there must controls in place to ensure that when West presses "OK" the result on the screen is indeed the correct score. The obvious control is EW get penalised 3 IMP for any incorrect scores which should be a good incentive to not press "OK" unless it's right.

There must be a way to describe mrdct that is worthy of being added to Josh's signature but I can't quite come up with it...

[mrdct]

I assume you are looking for a descriptor such as "strikingly handsome".

Don't get me wrong here, I think Bridgemates and other handheld scoring units are great but through one or more of player apathy, recorder inexperience, counter-intuitive software and inadequate data validation, they were a failure at Beijing because at the end of the day bridge fans simply could not rely on the website scores. This may not be a big deal for many, but some of us were having a punt here and there, sometime in-play, and it makes it kind of hard when the live scores can't be trusted.

I'm simply searching for a better mouse trap.

[Echognome]

I think the "double marking" solution is just plain inefficient. The solution of EW having a code that must be entered to validate is much better. That way, North cannot hit OK on the verification without entering in the code.

[PeterGill]

The Bridgemates were fine in Verona and everywhere else except ...

In the Transnational Mixed Teams I was astonished by what happened with
one of the Bridgemates as programmed in Beijing.

On one board, I (North) entered the score and waited for East to check the score.
but East was busy bidding the next hand and never touched the Bridgemate.
I then examined the Bridgemate for the Board in question - it said Board Already Played, i.e. after a while, it had timed out and agreed the score without East touching the Bridgemate. East later told me that she had not agreed the score yet on that board. I showed her that the Bridgemate prevented her from doing so - she could no longer see what I had entered.

So I checked by ensuring on a later board that I entered the score correctly, then I put the Bridgemate aside without East checking it. The board again "self-checked", i.e. it became Board Already Scored/Played without East checking it.

An announcement was made over a week earlier that the Bridgemates would be programmed differently for various events in Beijing. for example, in the Knockouts they were programmed to take in all yhe play anhd bidding, but in the round robins they were progammed to take only the bridge results.

Today a youth player told me that he thought the ultra-long time taken for the first session of the Youth Pairs was caused by Bridgemates, with play even stopping at one stage due to problems in the setting up of the Bridgemates, if his information can be relied upon.

Peter Gill
Australia.

[NickRW]

Well, the first time I used them I sat East and North handed me the unit and said if I agree the score, press OK. It was OK and I pressed OK. End of fuss.

If players are too busy bidding the next hand before the score has been agreed on the last one then all I can say there isn't a lot of hope - such people are going to mess up whatever you try to do to help them.

Nick

[shintaro]

lol Nickrw

I suspect that the same player would not even bother under old system of using TSS to even bother looking that what North had written was correct; then complain afterwards



But seriously the system we use here in Blighty seems to work very well North entering and East checking before OK'ing; any errors can and are altered by the little TD with his Key

[blackshoe]

What does the big TD do?

[shintaro]

The Big TD goes round with his Whip keeping the players in line

[blackshoe]

Heh. I use a nerf bat.