Get Competitive! > IAC Tourneys

Managing incompleted hands

(1/2) > >>

ian84:
There are various reasons why a player may not complete a hand

1. Connectivity issues
2. Substitutions
3. Unexpected distractions
4. Difficult hands
5. Naturally slow play
6. Inattention to the clock
7. Deliberate tactic intended to prevent opps getting a good score

As TDs we have a number of tools available to manage these issues
A. Add time to clock
B. Adjust hand using GIB result or manual judgement
C. Choose to allow the default 'Average' score to stand
D. Punish players by adjusting against them
E. Verbal warning at table when play is too slow

I try to use all of the above to achieve a fair, free flowing tourney where no-one is waiting too long. However, it may be that we need to work up a document which formalises our expectations and likely actions. I think there also needs to be a formalised procedure for when a player disagrees with a TD decision.

Over to you


 

kenberg:
I'll make a try at saying something useful. I can only speak for myself.

A: I prefer playing just as a foursome. Hopefully we then all four agree on how much time is right. When I play in something that is timed I just accept that sometimes I won't like how it goes.

B: In f2f games at the club I am not seen as a slow player. If anything, I sometimes help an opposing pair at a table catch up if they have fallen behind in starting the round.

C: I suppose that the round changes are at least somewhat automatic but they sometimes seems odd. I played in  the crazy slam session on Sunday with one board rounds. After we completed the first round we waited a while to be moved. Then, for the second hand, I was declarer and I claimed after four tricks Opponents accepted. Almost immediately we were whisked to board 3. Looking at the time stamp for the hands (I assume the time is for the time the hand started), it says I took 7 minutes to play board 2. That seems unlikely.

D: Another thing about the time stamps. Board 1 gives 14:08 and board 8 gives 15:07. So 59 minutes from the start of board 1 to the start of board 8, so 7 boards in 59 minutes. That's 8+, almost 8 and a half, minutes per board. I played board 6 and, by the time stamp, I started at 14:50 and was moved and given an average at 14:57. So yes, after 7 minutes I was not yet finished but I was almost finished and the time I had spent was about a minute and a half less than the average length of a round.

E: I am putting in these details because you say "over to you". I can understand why you are asking for feedback. My thought on Sunday was to just let it be. I assume you guys have a lot of work to do, you are doing your best. I knew I was going to make the hand, I had the play planned out, that's enough for me. There were alternative ways that would not work and so I was fine with not getting credit for it. To repeat, I am responding because you asked, this is not a complaint.


Just a comment on hand 6, only tangentially relevant. Most of the time was probably on the bidding. In a normal game we probably would have stopped in 3NT or possibly 5 !D. There is a lot to be said for playing in 5 !D. But this was called the crazy slam session so after some thought I decided I would pull 3 NT to 4 !D and then we went on to 6 !D.  I had to think about whether I just wanted to bit as I normally would or go with the crazy slam idea. For the slam, both black kings were a problem but my Rho had bid spades so I figured that one was located. Assuming the !S K to be on my right, the slam makes if the !C K is on my left and fails if it isn't. So staying out of slam is hardly crazy. I could have played it faster, really it was just a matter of where the black kings were, but I was playing a few rounds to see if any other option arose.

Good luck on figuring out a formalized procedure. I can see why you want it but I would hope everyone would just relax a bit.

Curls77:
I meant open this subject to discuss in admin / TD section, but I am glad Ian now brought it here, so we can hear what players, non-TDs think. I do not think any of us current IAC TDs are certified, specially not ACBL approved. But among our members we have quite few that are, or were official f2f TDs and they can help us with their opinions.
I only lately figured AVERAGE, and I dislike very much how it is handled in BBO, also unsure if it is same in f2f. I foolishly assumed that I can use AVE- to "punish" a pair in Survivor trny, for refusing to alert or for speaking in language other then english, even after warning. We, as TDs, never know what result table will have until round is over. In BBO MP, AVE+ gives 60% and AVE- gives 40%. We need be extra careful to not gift pair that we wanted punished by handing them 40% if their actual score was say 28%, we will make serious prejudice to opping pair that was not guilty at all. But when board is not finished, we have no clue what they could be really getting, and 40/60 seems very unfair to me.
Other day in IMP IAC trny, with 5 tables one table run out of time. EW were red against white and in slam contract. 3 tables made and 1 failed. TD decided leave AVE for that board, and guess what happened? Pairs that made got 5,33 IMPs, one that failed went down -16 IMPs. Both pairs that stayed AVE received then 0 IMPs. Is it fair ? Specialy coz declarer was just 2 tricks short of finishing the board. I am not sure how many IMPs it would be given for Ave+ and Ave-.

This happens very rarely, if ever, in team matches that are not clocked; but it's quite common in trnys. Those that use premade hands, usually give plenty of time to finish the board, even to the slowest players. But normal 7min board often is not enough with connection issues, need for subs etc.


--- Quote from: ian84 on January 21, 2020, 05:00:16 AM ---As TDs we have a number of tools available to manage these issues
A. Add time to clock
B. Adjust hand using GIB result or manual judgement
C. Choose to allow the default 'Average' score to stand
D. Punish players by adjusting against them
E. Verbal warning at table when play is too slow
--- End quote ---
Having in mind that timely play is responsibility of every player at the table, and when they realize they are slow, it's their duty to call TD timely. Not wait for last 2 mins while they are still bidding and call us, coz by then we won't have many possibilities to fix it.
And I think Ian's list should be:
a) Verbal warning at table when play is too slow
b) Add time to clock - if possible, we do not want annoy whole trny coz of one slow pair
c) Adjust hand using GIB result or manual judgement, when possible, can't do it when only 1 or 2 tricks were played unless it's super obvious how game will go, which is super rare
d) Choose to allow the default 'Average' score to stand, only when no other alternative.
e) Punish players by adjusting against them

Thanks Ken for bringing up the time stamp, I never bothered look close into it. Fact is that longer the round bigger the wait. From time stamps i see that first pair finished 4boards round at 19:32, and last at 19:46. That's 14 mins wait for many tables, and it is way too much imho. We risk people wander away and will need subs for next round.

jcreech:
For the sake of full disclosure, I was Ken's partner.  In f2f games I tend to be one of the faster players.  I will claim early unless I see an interesting line to gain an extra trick.

As a club director, I learned early that the fewer the boards in a round, the more likely you were to have time difficulties.  For three or more boards, I have found 7  minutes to work for 90+% of the players, for two boards, 15 minutes will work well for about 75-80% of the players.  I've never used a one board movement, but I would think that 8 minutes would work well with 60-70% in f2f games.  The reason is that some boards are easy and others are hard and require more time.  The more boards in play, the more likely it is that you will have easy boards to give you extra time to effectively play the hard ones. 

When you have only challenging hands and/or small numbers of boards per round, the players need more time.  Then as you add in other factors, such as connection speed, computer responsiveness and outside distractions that online players often seem to have, picking a reasonable amount of time can be challenging.  God forbid that someone crashes.  So I would add time compared to f2f
- for random deals 8 minutes per board for a 2 or 3 board round, and 9 minutes for a 1 board round;
- for selected problem hands (e.g., DARE), 8 minutes per board for a 3 board round, 9 minutes for a 2 board round, and 10 minutes for a 1 board round.  These are guesses; those who are experienced TDs for such events would have a better idea.

kenberg:

--- Quote from: Curls77 on January 21, 2020, 02:52:59 PM --- Fact is that longer the round bigger the wait. From time stamps i see that first pair finished 4boards round at 19:32, and last at 19:46. That's 14 mins wait for many tables, and it is way too much imho. We risk people wander away and will need subs for next round.

--- End quote ---

I hope for some caution here. A reasonable pace should be expected, but this does not mean that when one pair plays really fast everyone else should be expected to keep pace. Even if the fast pair can play really well at this fast pace, it would not be suitable for everyone.

As with most things, balance is desirable. Let's say Jim's suggestion is reasonable, 8 minutes a  board. So 32 minutes for a four board round. Call it 30 if you like, a nice round number. Suppose one pair finishes in 20 minutes. That should not obligate the rest of us to rush through our play.

Crazy eights is a fun game, or so I recall from childhood, and it is played really fast. Bridge is different.  A decent pace is expected, but it is not a race.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page