[Gerben42]

I guess we all should not enter tournaments where kibitzers are not allowed. Then they will know that we want kibs allowed!

[the hog]

Gerben42, on Aug 9 2005, 07:56 PM, said:

I guess we all should not enter tournaments where kibitzers are not allowed. Then they will know that we want kibs allowed!

Well thats what I said Gerben and then I got jumped on by McBruce.

[helene_t]

asdfg2k, on Aug 6 2005, 10:15 PM, said:

irincheto, on Aug 6 2005, 07:16 AM, said:

If some TDs are afraid of cheating, disallowing kibitzers will not help, I am afraid.

Will not "help"? Seriously? Of course it will "help". Will it eliminate it? Of course not. But it will most assuredly "help".

To argue otherwise is disingenuous.

Ok, I'd argue otherwise. If I were a cheater I would think twice when having kibbitzers watching me. They can see all four hands so they may detect some cheats that the opps won't.

[sceptic]

TD's choice whether we like it or not, BBO gives the option to bar kibbers, so there must be a reason for it..........

I can but can't sympathise with the TD that bars Kibbers, they are all deluded if the reason is to stop cheaters, if that is not the reason then what is their reason???

if you wish to cheat try www.skype.com, I imagine that this is the best way if you are that way inclined, Pard opens 1!C and responder says, hey nice do you have a major suit, I have a cracking hand. no need to kib anyone with the communication methods freely available to all.

My thoughts for what it is worth.

"Open the tables for kibbers" don't be square be fair (to us all, let us watch the game we love)

[scoob]

in response to the OP, some TDs start their tournament with kibs allowed and then after a few rounds disallow them specifically to see which players, if any, are suddenly no longer interested in playing the tournament. i'll let you draw your own inferences as to what this type of response indicates.

[Gerben42]

Right you might just as well try ICQ, AIM, MSN, or just a bloody telephone, or shout from the window if your partner happens to be right across the street.

Quote

i'll let you draw your own inferences as to what this type of response indicates.

You can't just quit a tournament. This is just for the TDs to affirm their belief that all players agree with "no kibitzing".

Quote

A player is getting huge scores every hand and has the same kibitzer? There is no way a TD could even verify that during the event.

Might that be the reason why the kibs are always watching this guy? In a Swiss the kibs normally flock to table 1. In Vugraph the room with the stronger players normally gets more viewers. People like to watch winners.

[inquiry]

Gerben42, on Aug 9 2005, 10:12 AM, said:

Might that be the reason why the kibs are always watching this guy? In a Swiss the kibs normally flock to table 1. In Vugraph the room with the stronger players normally gets more viewers. People like to watch winners.

For what it is worth, since all tables play the same hands, a "helpful" kibitzer doesnot have to sit at the table with the person he is helping. In fact, a kbiitzer who always follows a player is more often than not a fan, a friend, a student, or even someone who might think the person he is kibitzing is cheating and trying to catch them!!! It is not unheard of the kibitzer to be helping the person he is watching, but it is surely wrong thinking to think the "helper" has to be at the same table.

[Gerben42]

Quote

But if I were hosting a Pay tourney which gives BBO$ as prizes, that is the 1st loophole that I will shut.

Two comments:

1. People who want to cheat will. So no, it will not help.
2. You can't make a living from playing BBO pay tournaments. Cheaters are not doing it for the money.

If you think someone is cheating send details to abuse@ and don't let said player into your tourneys again.

[keylime]

Ben you forgot one thing:

Groupies. Gotta have bridge groupies to round it out.

[Elianna]

scoob, on Aug 9 2005, 06:44 AM, said:

in response to the OP, some TDs start their tournament with kibs allowed and then after a few rounds disallow them specifically to see which players, if any, are suddenly no longer interested in playing the tournament. i'll let you draw your own inferences as to what this type of response indicates.

Well, if I have someone that wants to learn bridge, and I sign up for a tournament so that she can watch me (since playing in the MBC among strangers is even more random than in an individual), and suddenly in the middle that tournament doesn't allow kibbitzers, am I going to want to continue playing in some tournament that means nothing to me? No. When I get upset and say something to the director, does that mean I was cheating and needed the kibs? I'd like to think not.

[McBruce]

Gerben42, on Aug 9 2005, 01:56 AM, said:

I guess we all should not enter tournaments where kibitzers are not allowed. Then they will know that we want kibs allowed!

My tournaments, which keep kibitzers out until everyone has played the first ten of fifteen boards, are averaging over 27 tables after 51 events. Not only that, they have other limitations that some on these forums have said were not even bridge--they are individuals, unclocked, and everyone is limited to SAYC. Yet we average over 27 tables!

If the majority, or even a great number of BBO players prefer no kibitzers and will not play in tournaments without them, how could this be?

Could it be that you perhaps are not a majority?

Could it be that maybe there are some things more important than whether kibitzers are allowed or not, like running a series of tournaments where the rules are clear, the rulings are consistent and the rating system and results web site is an attraction?

C'mon folks. BBO people read these forums; occasionally they make changes based on the opinions we give. I haven't seen them changing their rules to make sure kibitzers are allowed. They're not convinced by your arguments.

Organize a boycott; go ahead, make my day. If you think a successful boycott will convince me (or anyone) to change my rules, you are mistaken. You might, if you are successful, get me (and others) to quit running tournaments entirely.

Is that what you want?

I doubt that's what BBO wants.

[McBruce]

Gerben42, on Aug 9 2005, 06:20 AM, said:

People who want to cheat will. So no, it will not help [to bar kibitzers].

An analogy:

Wherever you happen to be in the world, open your wallet and have a look at some paper money. You will find fine lines, great detail, intricate watermarks, and even holographic patches.

Technology today is sufficient that people who want to counterfeit it will do so. So no, it will not help to take these silly countermeasures. Credit cards? Debit cards? Coins? Have a look. All have anti-counterfeit measures that technology can easily overcome if you are serious enough.

If your honest conclusion from this is to boycott money, I support you in your boycott of BBO tournaments that bar kibitzers.

[jillybean]

McBruce, on Aug 9 2005, 12:18 PM, said:

Gerben42, on Aug 9 2005, 01:56 AM, said:

I guess we all should not enter tournaments where kibitzers are not allowed. Then they will know that we want kibs allowed!

My tournaments, which keep kibitzers out until everyone has played the first ten of fifteen boards, are averaging over 27 tables after 51 events. Not only that, they have other limitations that some on these forums have said were not even bridge--they are individuals, unclocked, and everyone is limited to SAYC. Yet we average over 27 tables!

You could run a sayc only playing, 1 legged, half blind, no psyche with red cards, 5 and a half board tournament and still get players, it is simply a result of supply and demand. People not realising what they are signing up for, not caring or not knowing any different. It is no real indication of how well or otherwise the tournament is run or even if the TD remotely follows the laws of bridge.

[McBruce]

jillybean2, on Aug 9 2005, 02:20 PM, said:

You could run a sayc only playing, 1 legged, half blind, no psyche with red cards, 5 and a half board tournament and still get players, it is simply a result of supply and demand. People not realising what they are signing up for, not caring or not knowing any different. It is no real indication of how well or otherwise the tournament is run or even if the TD remotely follows the laws of bridge.

That post deserves a Robert Novak reply.

Instead, I shall simply point out that there are over 1300 players that have finished above average at least once in my 51 tournaments. Of these, over 25 tables are frequent players, finishing over average at least 5 times (which would indicate that they have played at least 10 times). Supply and demand may get people to try them, but getting people to return is a sign of a well-run series.

[Brandal]

luis, on Aug 5 2005, 04:48 PM, said:

Directors disallow kibs to prevent cheating. Assuming they need such a drastic measure then it's logical to think they charge for the inscription. I think that BBO should charge a higher comission to TDs running tourneys without kibs because they are using BBO for a private income without leting the other BBO members enjoy the show while TDs running tourneys where the public is allowed should be charged a lesser percentage.
That's what I think and about 70% of my ideas are wrong but I need to be wrong many times to make the other 30% appear :-)

Luis

For me it's a matter of wanting to watch others play....
whether it be friends or world class players or any inbetween.

When I play I have no preference either way,I don't really
care if it's kibs allowed or disallowed when I play.

I like watching others play,simple as that....in my case

[jillybean]

McBruce, on Aug 9 2005, 06:16 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Aug 9 2005, 02:20 PM, said:

You could run a sayc only playing, 1 legged, half blind, no psyche with red cards, 5 and a half board tournament and still get players, it is simply a result of supply and demand. People not realising what they are signing up for, not caring or not knowing any different. It is no real indication of how well or otherwise the tournament is run or even if the TD remotely follows the laws of bridge.

That post deserves a Robert Novak reply.

Instead, I shall simply point out that there are over 1300 players that have finished above average at least once in my 51 tournaments. Of these, over 25 tables are frequent players, finishing over average at least 5 times (which would indicate that they have played at least 10 times). Supply and demand may get people to try them, but getting people to return is a sign of a well-run series.

I am sure your tournaments are run very well and you have players wanting to play regularly.
Dare I say if you turn on kibitzers, those same players will still be back.

[Walddk]

Some players don't like to be watched; fair enough. It happens at all levels, even at expert level. We have had several examples of players refusing to appear on live vugraph in national championships.

They can refuse in certain national events, simply because the organisers forgot to make it part of "Conditions of Contest". That will only happen once, I am sure. In my opinion something like this must be stated in all CoCs:

"A pair cannot refuse to appear on live vugraph if asked to by the organisers or convenors".

Then all participants know in advance, and they can choose not to play in that particular tournament.

Roland