[mink]

hotShot, on Jun 18 2005, 04:08 PM, said:

... 1) The create tournament should have a "td is playing" checkbox. ...

The checkbox should be named "director might be playing", and it should not be possible to set this after the first pair has registered to the tourney. Consequently, if the box is not checked it should not be possible for the director to register.

Reason for the naming is: Imagine I want to run a tourney for the members of my local club, which results in a very small numer of tables. As I do not exactly know how many pairs will be there, I wait until the tourney has started, and if there is a sitout pair, I sub in a friend and myself. So when I create the tourney I am not sure if I will be playing or not, but I should be forced to check the option if I am considering to play as a sub.

If this box is not checked, everybody who registers should be sure that a non-playing director will be available. Therefore it should be possible to change it to playing director only as long as the tourney is still empty.

Karl

[fifee]

I think TD's should not simultaneously play and direct tournaments which are open to the public. Too much going on for everyone to have their questions addressed competently.

Private tournaments should be allowed to post their own rules and disclaimers. This would cover English juniors who would like to hold their own tournaments and other groups who are like minded.

[luke warm]

jillybean2, on Jun 18 2005, 09:11 PM, said:

I too have zero tolerance for rude behavior~snip

whew, i had to read that twice... thought you wrote NUDE behavior.. was gonna tell you to lighten up a little

[pigpenz]

i voted yes, even though in the ones that i run i never play cause i have a hard enough time keeping people adhering to the time limits on the rounds...imho a playing director just slows down the game, but its up to him if he wants to play our not.

[buburall]

hi:))
in last 3 days (from 3 days i have permission to make tournaments) i made tournaments with playing td
i made them small (8 tables/8rounds) for keep an eye on tables
in 1st round it's difficult because there are people leaving computers and must be replaced ... but from round2 become relative easy.
i find time to adjust boards ,,, but my play is not best i can
i am new ,,, but think nobody complained about me as td
to stay is hard,,, to play is hard... but i like more to play under stress
and,,,, i have to trust what a player say about what happened ... because i think bridge players are 99% gentlemans
sometimes i add time because many tables play... but nobody complain about this

[omeroj]

I'm a t.d and i think that if a director creat a tournament can't play in, never:)
or if want play must find a coodirector that can answer to call by all tables


Omero

[khaki]

I like most of ideas that hotshot stated. However, those may take some time to be realized.

The simplest way to avoid troubles caused by playing TD may be to associate options of Restriction with TD's ID. For example, playing TD is allowed when Restriction includes Friends (i.e. "Include friends of the host"), Private club ("Include memebers of my club") and the likes. In the rest of modes TD's registration is disabled becos the tourney will be open to quite public. And it also can be associated with the size of the tourney, etc.

[skorchev]

Hi, I think that TDs can play only if tourney is small (max 9-10 tables). Yesterday I played tournament with 27 tables (registration was open, but tnx God only 54 pairs registred), format was Survivor (I think 5% cut), 8 boards, 1 board per round. There was no announcment that TD is playing and whole the tourney was terrible - many adjustments, some disconnections and also at the half TD was disconnected. However the tournament end up succesfully, but it was just a horror. If Abuse interests who was the TD - call me ptivately on BBO (My nickname is "Skorchev").

Regards
Skorchev

[belladonna]

What i strongly object to (and see more and more of) is a tourney with a playing TD,limit to 120 ,no description at all,mostly TD dsnt speak english so I cant even ask him to state in tourney page that is playing TD - not to mention limiting to less then 120.sigh

[inquiry]

Playing TD continues to be a huge problem. Even when they put plainly in their description.. no adjustment, find your own subs, have fun....

They end up being a pain for yellows and frustrating for their "players".

Here is what happens.

1 - player uses call button, director doesnt come (he is playing he can't).
2.- Player then either continue to push it and annoy the director, and the director who is playing gets fed up wtih the call boxes that open and have to be dealt with so he boots the annoying player, or
3 - player calls a yellow to inform us there is no director and a yellow stops what he is doing to come check.. only to find a director..

Even in case 2, where the player is booted, what does he do? He contacts a yellow and complains about the TD. In one tourney yestersay with 40 or so tables and a playind director, I got calls alll day, people wanting me to cancel tourney, wanting me to adjust their scores, etc.

So I think I would like to enforce a rule that if there is a playing DIRECTOR it be in the tourney subject line, so yellows can EASILY ignore calls to those events. You play in it, you risk the consequences. Free market lets you choose, but once you choose, it is non-of the yellows business anymore. This is a major zap on our energy and to be quite honest, isn't worth our effort it takes to deal with all the calls about them.

[belladonna]

agree!! also must limit - how can a playing director handle 120 players (sometimes is 120 pairs even)

[hotShot]

I think every playing TD could live with Ben's suggestion . I don't know if the players will like it, but at least, one can point at the tourney description and say: "You could/should have known..."

I think it is less experienced hosts, that have the feeling that they are doing everyone a favor, if they allow many more players. Esp. if players start to ask for it urgently shortly before tourney start.

[epeeist]

Sure, a description that TD playing in the subject line (to avoid yellows wasting their time) sounds like a good idea.

However, players would still fail to read it...I've played in e.g. "Goulash" tournaments with that word in the title, and found (seriously) players after the hand stating "unusual distribution" to which I reply "well, it is goulash", and they reply "Oops, didn't even notice the title..." Which is very different from someone e.g. not knowing what the word "goulash" means.

However, the playing TD problem is simply one specific example of the broader problem of people NOT READING THE %*#( DESCRIPTION (or rules)! Or, in some cases I suppose not understanding the language in which the tournament is described, which is still annoying. The problem is not playing TDs, it's people who don't read that, entering, running into problems and calling yellows, wasting their (yellows) time.

I know, I know, nothing new that people don't read, but even someone more patient than me would be annoyed when e.g. in an SAYC ONLY tournament opponents started discussing using wj05 or something, I told them "this tournament is SAYC only" and one opponent said "I don't know SAYC". Though I did find it amusing when one opponent said to me privately after the bidding was over, while dummy, "p's 2♠ bid shows 6+ spades whether in SAYC or not", I replied "that's not what his explanation of the bid said".

[jillybean]

I don’t any way to stop people from messaging yellows with complaints during or after one of these tournaments. Even if players are aware of the rules they may still feel they have grounds to complain.

If you chose to ignore the messages, first determining it is coming from a player in a no-td tournament will take up time anyway.

Perhaps Uday can fix it so these players do not have message capabilities outside the tournament. Contain the chaos.

jb

[uday]

I don't think i want to block someone from being able to contact a yellow, at least, not yet

[tony stack]

I cant believe so many people take every tourney seriously, it is like thier life depends on winning the tourney, and they will do whatever it takes to win it(bug TD'S, bug Yellows if this dont work, then bug abuse if that dont work) Bridge is just a CARD game you play for FUN. People playing on bbo today dont play for that. This is why the issue has become SO important! The job of a Yellow Member is to Answer questions its users have and to Promote a fun enviroment to play bridge in.As well as making Improvements to bbo in order to better meet these objectives(I.E. Making Tourneys possible,Building the translater so everyone can understand what people are saying in their own laguages...etc) Not Making Score Adjustments in tourneys, subbing players,Canceling Tourneys without a TD...etc. However a Tourney with a non-playing director does not have to be limited to a certain Number of Pairs/Players, but You Put that in the tourney description box or in the rules of the tournament with something like"Read the tourney rules before you sign up to play or sub in this tourney" in the tournament description box. If this is a Big issue to everyone on bbo, I Recommend that the yellows do their job by adding functionality (the "Playing Tourney Director" check box on the Tourney creation screen, along with a popup window that is displayed to every player just after they have registered for the tourney saying something like "This Tourney will only have Playing Directors, There Might not be ANY Adjustments made by the TD's, No Yellows will Interfere with the Progression of This Tourney in any way!")

[jillybean]

tony stack, on Jun 29 2005, 09:11 PM, said:

Bridge is just a CARD game you play for FUN.

True but irrelevant

& I’m not sure if it is all about winning, I think people want a FAIR game.

Tournaments that run with playing directors have (more!) problems with deliberate hold up play, talk at table, mis alerted, non alerted bids and so on….. it is no longer bridge and I certainly don’t call it fun!

jillybean

This post has been edited by jillybean2: 2005-June-30, 14:39

[hotShot]

jillybean2, on Jun 30 2005, 04:49 PM, said:

tony stack, on Jun 29 2005, 09:11 PM, said:

Bridge is just a CARD game you play for FUN.

True but irrelevant

& I’m not sure if it is all about winning, I think people want a FAIR game.

Tournaments that run with playing directors, have problems with deliberate hold up play, talk at table, mis alerted, non alerted bids and so on….. it is no longer bridge and I certainly don’t call it fun!

jillybean

Do you really think it is much better with not playing TD's?

If you go to the table, can you see previous talk?
Can you see if the description of an alerted bit was changed?
Can you see when an alert text has been added?
Can you see if a bid was alerted using the "chat to both opps" button?
How do you know who was playing slowly, if everything is fine as long as you are around?
How do you know who's fault it is,when the last board of a round is unfinished. One pair played the first two boards very slow, and now when, for the first time, their opponents need to think for a moment and they complain to you about opps speed to make you adjust in their favor.

Even a non playing TD, is very limited in this environment.
And don't underestimate the fact, that you don't know any of the players.
I've been called because of a stuck opponent from players that waited 10s and from others that waited 5 minutes. Online you can only guess how long they were waiting at a table. How do you know that a player is deliberatly playing slow, has a very slow connection or can't act faster because of some disability?
What if you can't communicate with some of the players at the table.

I've run tourneys with and without playing myself, and i can tell you, both can run absolutely smothly, but a small number of troublemakers, destroy both.
Of cause, if you are playing you can take less trouble than non playing.

Do you read the tourney description, if a friend invites you to a tourney?
I don't think it is displayed in the invitation dialog.
I bet less than 25% know the tourney description and less than 10% know the rules.
If they call for the TD, and nobody answers, players feel ignored and of cause get angry. They should get a message, that the TD is unable to join the table because he is playing. This would help, because they know theat they are not ignored.

[jillybean]

hotShot, on Jun 30 2005, 10:19 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Jun 30 2005, 04:49 PM, said:

tony stack, on Jun 29 2005, 09:11 PM, said:

Bridge is just a CARD game you play for FUN.

True but irrelevant

& I’m not sure if it is all about winning, I think people want a FAIR game.

Tournaments that run with playing directors, have problems with deliberate hold up play, talk at table, mis alerted, non alerted bids and so on….. it is no longer bridge and I certainly don’t call it fun!

jillybean

Do you really think it is much better with not playing TD's?

Yep!

[bearmum]

helene_t, on Jun 15 2005, 06:45 PM, said:

Why constrain tournaments? Those who dislike playing TDs can just avoid them. There's allready a thread about the declining number of free tournaments.

Playing TDs sometimes make horrible rulings because they don't have time to do there job. So what? We're not talking about sexual abuse or financial fraud or anything. Come on, this is a card game.

ITA Helene why not lighten up all BBO players?? this site has FREE play (not like others) and if you dont like the conditions of any tourney you dont have to join

I just feel grateful that there are so many directors willing to run free tourneys