[McBruce]

Since it has long been the custom in this forum to smite anyone who decides to use ACBLScore's 'NP' (not played) option, which simply gives each pair their percentage score on the rest of the session's boards, keeping their percentage score unchanged -- here are a few more scenarios to consider. Remember, NP is not an option unless you want the wrath of the forum experts!

Scenario 1: With a half-table at gametime, you (TD) call a bunch of people and halfway through round one somebody agrees to come down and suffer through a game with you. Nobody wants a late play at the end of the evening and by the time the person arrives three boards in round one have not been played and there is only time for two of the three in the second round. You have a NS seat so you can stay near the scoring computer. What does the NS pair get for the missed boards? What does the EW pair get?

Scenario 2: In this one we have a NS pair with a player whose eyesight is fading; consequently this pair gets behind quite often. In round eight they are playing a pair who are constantly looking for ways to prove the other is at fault. They play two of three boards before the round is called and then Mrs. Personality gets up and goes to the washroom and returns at the next table, apparently thinking they had played all the boards they would play.

Three rounds pass and the TD is not notified of this incident. Finally, as travelers are being picked up during the last round, the North player mentions that they didn't play the board, and that Mr. Personality thought they should both be given average minus. Mr. Personality (whose rulings when directing are so consistently off the wall that I try to get his opinion whenever possible, to find out what not to do...), when asked what happened on the board, first says "Nothing!" then says "both sides are complicit." Mrs. Personality still doesn't understand the problem. Nobody wants to stay long enough to play the board late. What do you give these two pairs? Careful, read 12C2a carefully first. Is it even possible for both sides to be 'directly' at fault?

[Vampyr]

McBruce, on Dec 13 2009, 06:55 PM, said:

What does the NS pair get for the missed boards?  What does the EW pair get?

NS get average, EW get average+.

Quote

Scenario 2:  What do you give these two pairs? 

Obviously average- for the pair that went to the wrong table before the round was finished. It seems like average- also for the pair who didn't inform the director that the other pair had left before play in the round was finished.

In what primitive place is this being played, though? Normally the Bridgemate will not allow you to go on to a new round when there are boards unplayed in the previous round.

These seemed pretty simple -- I am looking forward to discovering what I am missing!

[TylerE]

Hah. Done here in District 7 land I've seen Bridgemates in use exactly once...and that was at a regional.

[blackshoe]

That's one more time than I've seen them, in the hinterlands of northwestern NY.

[gordontd]

Vampyr, on Dec 13 2009, 07:48 PM, said:

Normally the Bridgemate will not allow you to go on to a new round when there are boards unplayed in the previous round.

You can go on to play the next round - it's just when you come to score it after you've played the first board that you discover the problem.

[wank]

and i've seen bridgemates millions of times, and seen them set up and working correctly about once.

[blackshoe]

Is there no way, with Bridgemates, to annotate a board as not played, or schedule one for a late play?

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on Dec 14 2009, 04:19 PM, said:

Is there no way, with Bridgemates, to annotate a board as not played, or schedule one for a late play?

Sure you can, but you have to enter it. So you couldn't just forget a board.

[blackshoe]

Ah. PEBKAC.

[jeremy69]

Quote

and i've seen bridgemates millions of times, and seen them set up and working correctly about once.

I am surprised that you assert this. I've been in clubs where initially they had a problem with signal strength that was resolved after a short while and I've occasionally seen then lock up early in a session at an EBU tournament usually when there is a late change to the movement but this is quite rare now. At the last congress I attended they worked in all six sessions without a problem. In contrast the big plus is that scores are very quick to come out. If I come upstairs to the bar at my usual club having finished the last board then I can see my final score bar one or two unfinished boards and that's a pretty good service.

[gordontd]

jeremy69, on Dec 14 2009, 05:34 PM, said:

Quote

and i've seen bridgemates millions of times, and seen them set up and working correctly about once.

I am surprised that you assert this.

Me too. There can occasionally be problems, but they are less & less frequent. For example the Brighton Congress Swiss Pairs, which had 218 tables in four sections playing 14 matches with sections merged between sessions went off without a Bridgemate problem (as far as I'm aware). It's probably the most complex event they're used for, but thanks to the preparatory work that Ian Mitchell put in at the EBU it all went smoothly both years that they've been used.

When there are problems it's usually due to operator error, and as directors become familiar with the various setups they become more adept at dealing with the problems that arise. I had an event where I had problems recently, but it involved two sections of teams-of-twelve running alongside a section of teams-of-eight, and it was the first time Bridgemates had been used for it. Hopefully with the benefit of what I learned from the problems that arose, next time round it will run more smoothly.

[gnasher]

I often find that the Bridgemate records the wrong score, or records a score against the wrong board, or even misses out a score entirely. Oddly, it seems to happen mainly when I'm North.

[bluejak]

Scenario 1 sounds to me like something that might happen regularly. Clubs I play in always have a sitout if there is an odd number of pairs, but it is obviously helpful to players generally if there are no sitouts. So I think it should be a matter of regulation for the club, so that it is a consistent solution. I could imagine a club deciding N/S should get Ave+ in these circumstances, but Vampyr's solution is normal enough. Of course E/W get Ave+ since they are no way at fault.

If a player takes 6 minutes to play a single card on the first board, and as a result the third board of the set is unplayable, he gets Ave- because he is "directly at fault". If one of his opponents takes 6 minutes to play a single card on the second board, and as a result the third board of the set is unplayable, he gets Ave- because he is "directly at fault". It is perfectly normal for both pairs to be "directly at fault". In each case if they had not delayed there would just about have been time to play the third board. Note that "directly at fault" is not the same as "solely at fault".

In Scenario 2, when the round was called, the third board had not been started. Unless it is known that one side was the cause, it is normal to give Ave- Ave-.



Incidentally, Bridge Mates require wireless. As soon as wireless is introduced to the farther bits of the colonies, no doubt Bridge Mates will follow.

[bluejak]

gnasher, on Dec 14 2009, 08:17 PM, said:

I often find that the Bridgemate records the wrong score, or records a score against the wrong board, or even misses out a score entirely.  Oddly, it seems to happen mainly when I'm North.

Funnily enough, it used to be the same with travellers, did it not?

[Chris3875]

Knowing that I will incur the wrath you spoke of, but also being aware that people will take pity on me because I am so new - in scenario 1 I would certainly make the boards "not played" - in my opinion it's the only honest answer !

In scenario 2 - I try to be as gentle as possible with people who are enjoying their game of bridge despite physical restrictions. I think Mrs Personality's decision to stomp off to the washroom because "she" decided there was no time to play the last board deserves an Av-. Maybe the opposition should have notified the director but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt assuming that they were probably intimidated and give them an Av.

[bluejak]

The problem is that an answer that is against the Laws of bridge cannot be termed an honest answer. It might be certain things - easy, for example, or practical - but it is definitely not honest. You have illegally skewed the results and no way can that be described as honest.

[Chris3875]

SMACK !

[jeffford76]

I give NP in case 1, and I don't think it's illegal. The director sets the movement, and nothing in the laws requires everyone to play the same number of boards. When I scramble to find a fill-in, I run a modified version of the standard movement in which one table doesn't play the first round. It's the same as when there's a scheduled sit-out. The pairs that have a sit-out don't get average+ for the boards they don't play. In practice putting in NP is a lot faster than editing the movement.

On the other hand I think you *must* give artificial scores for boards missed for slow play during the event, although I think I'm the only director at my local club who does so. Given what you said, I lean toward average- for the pair that disappeared and average for the pair that didn't call.

[blackshoe]

jeffford76, on Dec 14 2009, 08:04 PM, said:

In practice putting in NP is a lot faster than editing the movement.

Does it have the same overall effect on the score?

[Chris3875]

I had scored a session on my computer recently for another club when their system went haywire - so I just went into it and made 3 boards "not played" by pairs 3 and 5 - it didn't alter the results. We are talking here about a club event - green points only ?