[gnasher]

Vampyr, on Feb 23 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

In the UK we use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, multiple teams and knockouts. Is there some format in the US that is not conducive to the use of Bridgemates?

Do we use them for Swiss teams?

[Vampyr]

McBruce, on Feb 24 2010, 12:00 AM, said:

The Swiss principle is the same, but here we don't normally number the tables from 1 to however many teams there are; often there are four or more pairs of lettered tables involved, and we pair teams as they become matchable instead of waiting until all the results are in. A winning team in a large one session Swiss may play their four matches at table A5/B5, G8/H8, C12/D12, and C7/D7. There is a huge scrum around the assignments table as teams wait for their next match assignment.

I shouldn't think the table numbers would make a difference, but I am surprised by the method with which Swiss pairings are made in the ACBL.

The Bridgemate problem would be eliminated by instructing the players not to enter scores until the previous round is finished; but that is not the problem I notice with the method. I assume that they know enough about what they are doing that they don't end up with the last few pairs and no appropriate match-ups; but the procedure offers considerable scope to choose your opposition.

[Vampyr]

gnasher, on Feb 24 2010, 10:29 AM, said:

Vampyr, on Feb 23 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

In the UK we use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, multiple teams and knockouts. Is there some format in the US that is not conducive to the use of Bridgemates?

Do we use them for Swiss teams?

I thought we did; am I mistaken about this?

[gordontd]

gnasher, on Feb 24 2010, 10:29 AM, said:

Vampyr, on Feb 23 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

In the UK we use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, multiple teams and knockouts. Is there some format in the US that is not conducive to the use of Bridgemates?

Do we use them for Swiss teams?

I think they have been used for Swiss Teams, but not much. The scoring programmes can certainly do it and they may well be used a bit more for Swiss Teams in the future. The reason I've held back from using them is because of the danger of mis-matches if there are scoring errors.

[Vampyr]

gordontd, on Feb 24 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 24 2010, 10:29 AM, said:

Vampyr, on Feb 23 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

In the UK we use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, multiple teams and knockouts. Is there some format in the US that is not conducive to the use of Bridgemates?

Do we use them for Swiss teams?

I think they have been used for Swiss Teams, but not much. The scoring programmes can certainly do it and they may well be used a bit more for Swiss Teams in the future. The reason I've held back from using them is because of the danger of mis-matches if there are scoring errors.

Doesn't the same hold true for Swiss pairs, where Bridgemates are always used?

Once in Brighton Paul and I lost a match 0-20 because our one excellent score was entered the wrong way. We and our opponents got the wrong assignments as a result. Once in a multiple teams our team didn't qualify for a final because of the same thing happening -- our captain didn't check the results until after he came back from dinner. So if mistakes like this are a reason not to use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, they are a reason not to use them at all.

By the way, in the first incident the scores were not changed, because another match had been completed when our opponent realised what had happened. Naturally, I didn't like this, and didn't understand. Can anyone tell me a good reason for not changing the VP totals after the fact?

[gordontd]

Vampyr, on Feb 25 2010, 02:18 AM, said:

gordontd, on Feb 24 2010, 01:23 PM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 24 2010, 10:29 AM, said:

Vampyr, on Feb 23 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

In the UK we use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, multiple teams and knockouts. Is there some format in the US that is not conducive to the use of Bridgemates?

Do we use them for Swiss teams?

I think they have been used for Swiss Teams, but not much. The scoring programmes can certainly do it and they may well be used a bit more for Swiss Teams in the future. The reason I've held back from using them is because of the danger of mis-matches if there are scoring errors.

Doesn't the same hold true for Swiss pairs, where Bridgemates are always used?

The difference is that Swiss Pairs are usually scored a round in arrears, so there's time to catch mis-scores before the asssigned round starts.

[Vampyr]

gordontd, on Feb 25 2010, 09:55 AM, said:

The difference is that Swiss Pairs are usually scored a round in arrears, so there's time to catch mis-scores before the asssigned round starts.

But why are Swiss Pairs scored a round in arrears anyway (now that Bridgemates are available)?

I think it is pretty rough that the correction period is over before the players have had a break.

[gordontd]

Vampyr, on Feb 25 2010, 09:20 PM, said:

gordontd, on Feb 25 2010, 09:55 AM, said:

The difference is that Swiss Pairs are usually scored a round in arrears, so there's time to catch mis-scores before the asssigned round starts.

But why are Swiss Pairs scored a round in arrears anyway (now that Bridgemates are available)?

Smaller events, like the ones I run at the Young Chelsea, are now run using current assignments, but it does make it slower because we have to wait for the slowest table to finish before assigning, posting, and starting the next round.

At a large event like Brighton that effect of slowing down the game would be greater, and any scoring error would be unlikely to be noticed before the next round had started, and might require a couple of mis-match adjustments.

[McBruce]

In team games here, captains fill out a slip showing team numbers and IMP margins, get it signed by the opposing captain, and hand it into the desk. If there is an error on the slip resulting in a wrong matching, we correct and re-match if possible, but if the next round has started we cannot correct the matching, but we do correct the scores -- and we instruct the players to be more careful in filling in the slips (or checking that the winners have done so correctly).

With a good Bridgemate program, you would play your boards and enter them as played, with N-S entering and E-W confirming. At the end of the set, the console would display results and how many boards were entered at the other table, and perhaps show IMP differences for boards completed. Once everything was done, you could go back to the home table and compare in the usual way and check the results against the console. Eventually all results would be in (or time would expire and unplayed boards would be scored as pushes) and the console would then display which table to go to for the next round. The pairs who ran out of time would have little or no time to re-confirm the scores, a just penalty for slow play...

Round in arrears has always seemed suboptimal to me: don't we want the current leaders to play? The penultimate round leaders might never meet!

[shintaro]

Vampyr, on Feb 24 2010, 08:18 PM, said:

Once in Brighton Paul and I lost a match 0-20 because our one excellent score was entered the wrong way. We and our opponents got the wrong assignments as a result. Once in a multiple teams our team didn't qualify for a final because of the same thing happening -- our captain didn't check the results until after he came back from dinner. So if mistakes like this are a reason not to use Bridgemates for Swiss teams, they are a reason not to use them at all.

By the way, in the first incident the scores were not changed, because another match had been completed when our opponent realised what had happened. Naturally, I didn't like this, and didn't understand. Can anyone tell me a good reason for not changing the VP totals after the fact?

Scores being entered wrongly in Swiss Pairs is due mainly by Pairs siting the wrong direction. Pair x Should have sat N/S and V V, so the Computer thinks they have and you get a wrong score and subsequently Mis-matched. this could also have happened by manual scoring. Mainly due to 'Bridge Players' seeing a 'hole' at a table and sitting down.

Your Mis-match would/should have been altered ie you would get your 20 and your old opps get their 0 then the mis-match rules kick in your New opps get threequaters of their score + 5 VP's

Your OLD opps get threequarters of their score at the NEW table + 5 VP'

[shintaro]

McBruce, on Feb 27 2010, 06:00 AM, said:

Round in arrears has always seemed suboptimal to me: don't we want the current leaders to play? The penultimate round leaders might never meet!

It is felt that in Large fields especially you are only playong say 15 matches so out of say 250 pairs it doesn't really matter

Not my opinion

[helene_t]

shintaro, on Feb 28 2010, 10:57 AM, said:

Scores being entered wrongly in Swiss Pairs is due mainly by Pairs siting the wrong direction.

Hmmm .... at the club, the vast majority of wrong scores are due to the result not being entered correctly, typically they forget that the contract was doubled, or sometimes they enter it as played by NS instead of EW. An advantage of players seeing what happened at other tables is that they will usually notice the mistake when doing so. My guess is that some 5% of results are entered wrongly, roughly half of them are corrected by EW before confirming, the other half corrected during the review after confirming. The amount of wrong results that do not get corrected at all is probably slightly lower for bridgemates than for manual scoring or optical readers.

I wonder why this would be different at Swiss?

[gordontd]

helene_t, on Feb 28 2010, 01:22 PM, said:

I wonder why this would be different at Swiss?

It's not, but the consequences of it happening, especially when using current assignments, are different.

[JoAnneM]

I got a Bridgemate II demo unit in the mail from the company. Seems nice, not sure what I am supposed to do with it.

[blackshoe]

I have a birthday coming up. :-)

[NickRW]

JoAnneM, on Mar 9 2010, 12:14 AM, said:

I got a Bridgemate II demo unit in the mail from the company. Seems nice, not sure what I am supposed to do with it.

Ya could always have it mailed to me. My club doesn't have one.

[TimG]

I don't see prices listed. How much do bridgemates go for? While I'm asking, how much for dealing machines (that read non-bar coded cards) these days?

[gnasher]

TimG, on Mar 9 2010, 05:15 PM, said:

I don't see prices listed.  How much do bridgemates go for?

Did you try:

http://www.bridgemat...subpage=Pricing

http://shop6.mailordercentral.com/baronbar...g/products/110/

[TimG]

gnasher, on Mar 9 2010, 12:39 PM, said:

TimG, on Mar 9 2010, 05:15 PM, said:

I don't see prices listed.  How much do bridgemates go for?

Did you try:

http://www.bridgemat...subpage=Pricing

http://shop6.mailordercentral.com/baronbar...g/products/110/

Thanks, I did not check Baron Barclay, but I did look around the Bridgemate site and just didn't find the pricing page.

[NickRW]

It seems to me that the main Bridgemate site is not, itself actually selling Bridgemates. It has a list of distributors - form where I am, the UK distributors site has the pricing data. I assume it works the same in other parts.