[Walddk]

sceptic, on Aug 13 2005, 09:16 PM, said:

As for setting standards for TD's online, do it and 90% of all the free tourneys would stop... who wants that?  NOT ME

More than 90%, Wayne. One has two options:

Accept the rulings that are made no matter how horrible they are, or stop playing tourneys if you can't live with the rulings.

Roland

[candybar]

sceptic, on Aug 13 2005, 02:16 PM, said:

As for setting standards for TD's online, do it and 90% of all the free tourneys would stop... who wants that?  NOT ME.

I totally disagree with this. I sincerely believe that if we had standards, the TDs that currently run tournaments would make the effort to learn what they need to know, and continue running tournaments.

I also think it is a very sad commentary on the state of BBO tournaments that you believe 90% of the free tournaments on BBO are run by TDs who couldn't meet minimum standards of directing. And remember, the problem is not limited to free tournaments, either.

Personally, I think you are wrong. If you want to make rough guesses, I'd guess about half the TDs running free tournaments know what they are doing quite well. The other half should learn or stop running tournaments and causing the type of problems that keep being posted here.

Walddk, on Aug 13 2005, 02:49 PM, said:

Accept the rulings that are made no matter how horrible they are, or stop playing tourneys if you can't live with the rulings.

I don't want to stop playing in tournaments, and I don't want to accept horrible rulings either. We don't have to do that in live bridge, why should we here? There must be a better way.

[Walddk]

candybar, on Aug 13 2005, 11:03 PM, said:

I don't want to stop playing in tournaments, and I don't want to accept horrible rulings either. We don't have to do that in live bridge, why should we here? There must be a better way.

Certainly. Do you have time to teach and/or educate them? And if you have, do you think thay can be bothered? The answer is depressing I predict.

Roland

[candybar]

Walddk, on Aug 13 2005, 05:19 PM, said:

candybar, on Aug 13 2005, 11:03 PM, said:

I don't want to stop playing in tournaments, and I don't want to accept horrible rulings either.  We don't have to do that in live bridge, why should we here?   There must be a better way.

Certainly. Do you have time to teach and/or educate them? And if you have, do you think thay can be bothered? The answer is depressing I predict.

Roland

Yes, I have time to teach TDs, I do it already in live bridge. Yes, they will be 'bothered' if there is BBO support for standards of knowledge to run tournaments.

[Walddk]

candybar, on Aug 14 2005, 12:43 AM, said:

Yes, I have time to teach TDs, I do it already in live bridge. Yes, they will be 'bothered' if there is BBO support for standards of knowledge to run tournaments.

In that case I suggest that you write an e-mail to support@. I can't imagine that they would not consider your offer.

Roland

[sceptic]

Quote

i'm sure i don't need to draw analogies to show where that logic seems flawed...

actually I would be interested in the analogies, if you care to dispute my somewhat (I think quite conservative guess at 90%)

Quote

Yes, I have time to teach TDs, I do it already in live bridge. Yes, they will be 'bothered' if there is BBO support for standards of knowledge to run tournaments

Candy, I am very impressed, first time I have seen someone prepared to do something positive about an issue

another idea would be to compile a list of qualified TD's available online and that way, one can, if ones so wishes, only enter these tournaments.

I personally think (this is something I have never done, but I may do it in the furure as the issues that need addressing in the Tournamnets are far worse for directors than a bad ruling or two for a player) restrict free tourneys to friends only and create a blacklist of players that you can prevent entering your tourneys (the list may well be of horendous size and I doubt BBO has the server space available to keep track of all results orientated deserters).

also online, there may not be enough time to resolve issues in a timely manner and in defence of some TD's that may have made a bad decision, I am sure unless you run a Tournamnet online yourself, (with time restrictions and a host of people wanting the TD at the same time as a few disconnects) you are not always being fair to the TD's (they seem to come under a lot of critisism here.

I do recall a long time ago, a very well respected person that frequents these forum walls, directing and unless I am mistaken, he or she gave it up out of frustration, which is a great shame (it is not as easy as you think, online has its own issues not available to a F2F director.

p.s nicf (sorry none of this is in answer to your original post)

[luke warm]

personally, i usually am critical of those tds who act as if they know what they're doing and their rulings make it plain that they don't, and the ones who just don't seem to care whether they're right or wrong... the good ones, or at least those who are trying to be good ones, ask questions... look at jilly's posts, for example... it's obvious to me that she really wants answers to her questions

Quote

As for setting standards for TD's online, do it and 90% of all the free tourneys would stop... who wants that? NOT ME

'as for setting standards for school teachers, do it and 90% of them would go on strike... who wants that?'

'As for setting standards for _________, do it and 90% of _________ would stop... who wants that? NOT ME'

either a thing is objectively right to do or it isn't... either it's possible or it isn't.. if it's both right and possible, at least attempt it... now it's possible to argue about whether or not what's 'right' is objective or subjective... that's a different kettle of fish... i'd like to hear why it's *wrong* to have standards

fear of the result is rarely a good reason to refuse to do something that is right, imo

[sceptic]

Jilly would appear one of the exceptions, she does seem to care a great deal about learning, it still is not apparent why people complain about standards of TD's when once they know who the bad ones are they can avoid them.

it really is that simple, I have no desire to be a competant TD, but I do enjoy running the odd quickie tourney and from comments rec from players they are welcomed even when I announce non proffesional TD and I will adjust only if I can see it is obvious.

So supply and demand rules, there is space for less serious tourneys and there should be room for all, I disagree that we should all have to take some competency test, that is my opinion and I can live happily with it

[candybar]

sceptic, on Aug 13 2005, 08:24 PM, said:

I have no desire to be a competant TD, but I do enjoy running the odd quickie tourney

If the opportunity were offered to make you into a competent TD, would you take it?
If it meant, say for example, 3 1-hour sessions in a chat room, would you make the effort to come?

[jillybean]

Thanks for the plug "Those TD's" don't read this forum and so that leaves the TD's who do try to do a good job reading all the **** about how badly tournaments are run.

Constructive criticism is of course most welcome

[the hog]

Before anyone takes you up on this Candybar, it might be advisable to post your qualifications.

[candybar]

The_Hog, on Aug 13 2005, 09:56 PM, said:

Before anyone takes you up on this Candybar, it might be advisable to post your qualifications.

I will certainly provide my credentials to BBO support if they request it.

I'm more concerned about whether there will be enough motivation to get people to come and learn. It's pretty depressing to give a class and nobody attends. I would do this only if there were some BBO support to convince TDs it was worth their time.

For general information though, I am just a plain ole ACBL Certified Director with more than 20 years experience directing live games. I also have extensive teaching experience in several diverse fields. If you or someone else feels better qualified, please signify by saying, "I volunteer", and I'll be delighted to help you. Until then, I feel comfortably qualified to do it.

[bendare]

Right on, Candy!!

I couldn't agree with you more. Keep up the good work.

[coyot]

I would not really care if 90% of the tournaments disappeared.
I think that pretty soon, a good half of them would be back.

My guess is that at least 50% of the problems with TDs are caused by lack of knowledge. Since online bridge prevents a lot of problems (revokes, out of turn bids, insufficient bids, wrong leads etc.), the knowledge needed for TD shrinks to a small portion of the f2f TD. The TD basically needs to know the following:

1) wrong claims and how to handle them (pick basically any line of play that is not nonsensical. The only details are i.e. is crossruff obvious or not?

2) Non-alerted bids - judging whether it caused any damage and adjusting

3) Use of UI (which narrows to hesitation here)

4) General behaviour issues (i.e. refusing to explain bids as above)

Add anything I left out... And ask yourself - is it so hard it would scare out anyone good from the 90%? (I really don't mind the systematically bad TDs to leave...)

[sceptic]

Quote

If the opportunity were offered to make you into a competent TD, would you take it?
If it meant, say for example, 3 1-hour sessions in a chat room, would you make the effort to come?

YES, I would be more than happy to learn, if a chance is available, which kind of goes against my previous statement, but what The heck, men are supposed to be Hypocrits

[jillybean]

coyot, on Aug 14 2005, 02:44 AM, said:

Add anything I left out... And ask yourself - is it so hard it would scare out anyone good from the 90%? (I really don't mind the systematically bad TDs to leave...)

5) Make decisions under strict time constraints (Minutes)

6) Communicate with people not speaking your language.

7) Have knowledge of multiple different bidding systems.

8) Find suitable subs for people who have fallen off their chair or walked out of the building all together.

[Echognome]

Just a thought to throw out there. Suppose there was a BBO TD qualification test online. I know there are a couple of tests out there for TD's already. When BBO members request the right to host tournaments they take this test. Even if they can go through and retake it, at least it makes them read through it and see why they were right or wrong.

Then you can go down one of a couple avenues. One method is just that TDs that passed the test (or passed X many tests) are given a certain marking on their username whether this be a colour or a small symbol or whatever is not important. Thus, anyone that wants to play in a tournament will know if that TD has received this online qualification.

Another route that might be good is that ONLY those members that have passed the qualification test may offer a public tournament. Those that have not may have a private tournament, but ONLY under the conditions that they will not get any reprieve from BBO when playing in them (except for the general problems of abuse).

The advantage of this system is that the set up costs are a one time affair and I believe rather minimal. Also, I'm guessing that it might be a reasonably fun tasks for some TDs to set the problems. However, who the ultimate arbitor on the questions will be is somewhat vague.

The potential disadvantage is that someone may be able to pass the qualification simply by memorising the answers or taking the test multiple times. If it means that the member reads the answers and learns from them, I cannot see this being a problem. Also, it may not be a very good way of distinguishing between good and bad TDs.

Having run a few tournaments myself, I can understand the thankless part of the job hosting free tournaments and my goal is not to make it less attractive to do so. However, it can potentially be a step in educating TDs and making a happier bridge environment for everyone.

[sceptic]

Quote

(I really don't mind the systematically bad TDs to leave...)

That is your opinion, why then do so many still enter tourneys with a playing TD (this is my pet hate), why do they enter so many tourneys with (alegedly) bad TD's

may be the answer is they just want to play some stable games with their p, or it is a good place to meet future friends and partners.

I believe there is room for all, so organise TD training, I think I am swayed by that arguement as a positive move forward, maybe it would be a step forward in a more pleasant environment.

OR run a tourney as a competant TD and get some one like me that does not mind doing the odd tourney and I can get subs, help out etc etc and leave the technical stuff to the experts and perhaps learn in the process.

Stop belittling a TD for trying to run a tourney how he wants, if you don't like it . don't play in his tourneys, avoid the TD's you think are bad.

just an aside, when was the last post complaining about a TD for a favorable judgement? when it was not deserved

[candybar]

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2005, 08:38 AM, said:

5) Make decisions under strict time constraints (Minutes)

6) Communicate with people not speaking your language.

7) Have knowledge of multiple different bidding systems.

8) Find suitable subs for people who have fallen off their chair or walked out of the building all together.

These things are not particularly relevant to the discussion of TDs who know the Laws, but more to the TDing process. I addressed a couple of them in the TD Wish List, such as delayed results and a tournament management window to help speed things up.

However, to address your points,

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2005, 08:38 AM, said:

5) Make decisions under strict time constraints (Minutes)

Thorough knowledge of the Laws will help with this.

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2005, 08:38AM, said:

6) Communicate with people not speaking your language.

There is nothing you can do about this except restrict your tournaments to those who speak languages that you or your co-TDs do.

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2005, 08:38, said:

7) Have knowledge of multiple different bidding systems.

General familiarity with the main bidding systems and conventions is helpful, but not critical. A knowledgeable TD can apply the Laws without having to know the details of a system.

jillybean2, on Aug 14 2005, 08:38, said:

8) Find suitable subs for people who have fallen off their chair or walked out of the building all together.

This is a function of the software and at the moment is quite useable, not much of a problem in my experience.

[jillybean]

sigh