For the Australian National Open Teams early next year, I am planning to cover the quarter-finals, semi-finals and the final. Each is a 64-board match played on Saturday 22 Jan 2005, Sunday 23 Jan 2005 and Monday 24 Jan 2005 respectively.
I will have available sufficient infrastructure and operators to cover two tables only so I'm interested in what people's preferences are as to whether I should do dual-table coverage of one match (thereby enabling spectators to see the full bidding and play at both tables using the "movie" function) or single-table coverage of two separate matches (whereby only the contract and number of tricks will be known for the closed room comparative - but fans can stay on top of what going on in both semi-finals).
Page 1 of 1
Semi-final vugraph coverage when operator resources are limited
#1
Posted 2004-November-08, 16:04
Disclaimer: The above post may be a half-baked sarcastic rant intended to stimulate discussion and it does not necessarily coincide with my own views on this topic.
I ♦ bidding the suit below the suit I'm actually showing not to be described as a "transfer" for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the concept of a transfer
I ♦ bidding the suit below the suit I'm actually showing not to be described as a "transfer" for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the concept of a transfer
#2
Posted 2004-November-08, 17:19
mrdct, on Nov 8 2004, 05:04 PM, said:
For the Australian National Open Teams early next year, I am planning to cover the quarter-finals, semi-finals and the final. Each is a 64-board match played on Saturday 22 Jan 2005, Sunday 23 Jan 2005 and Monday 24 Jan 2005 respectively.
I will have available sufficient infrastructure and operators to cover two tables only so I'm interested in what people's preferences are as to whether I should do dual-table coverage of one match (thereby enabling spectators to see the full bidding and play at both tables using the "movie" function) or single-table coverage of two separate matches (whereby only the contract and number of tricks will be known for the closed room comparative - but fans can stay on top of what going on in both semi-finals).
I will have available sufficient infrastructure and operators to cover two tables only so I'm interested in what people's preferences are as to whether I should do dual-table coverage of one match (thereby enabling spectators to see the full bidding and play at both tables using the "movie" function) or single-table coverage of two separate matches (whereby only the contract and number of tricks will be known for the closed room comparative - but fans can stay on top of what going on in both semi-finals).
single table,both semis
we can only be at one table,this way we can choose which match to watch
"Never argue with fools, they'll drag you down to their level, and then, beat you with experience"
#4
Posted 2004-November-09, 03:24
Hi mrdct !
I'm a big fan of vu-graph and both are fine for me if there are comparisons !
However, I think that it would be better to see both semis so that the persons who personnally know the players can choose which table to watch.
Alain
I'm a big fan of vu-graph and both are fine for me if there are comparisons !
However, I think that it would be better to see both semis so that the persons who personnally know the players can choose which table to watch.
Alain
Alain
#5
Posted 2004-November-09, 04:38
I vote both semi-finals one table. Many people will be rooting for one team and if only one match is shown (the other match) that's not so good.
Comparisons are quite easy to do. A director or caddy should copy the scores from the official sheet when they become available and give them to the operator.
Comparisons are quite easy to do. A director or caddy should copy the scores from the official sheet when they become available and give them to the operator.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
Page 1 of 1

Help
