Frosty

Given the opportunity to contribute “forum fodder”, I would normally pass, but I really cannot resist taking the bait on this one :rolleyes: Question: Was the issue of reviewing convention cards a factor in the TD answering/assessing/addressing Glen’s call? Answer: No Question: Did the issue of reviewing convention cards take place before, during or after the call was addressed? Answer: After Question: How did the issue of reviewing convention cards become a topic of conversation after the call had already been completed? Answer: TD – “I asked bidder to alert in the future” Glen – “thanks - we would be unable to know if bid is not alerted” TD – “it is on their Convention Card” Glen – “we should not have to look at cc for every bid” Question: Did the TD suggest that the opponents CC be reviewed for every bid? Answer: No. However, the TD does expect that responsible bridge players - especially those of Glen’s caliber - should and would review the opponent’s CC as a matter of practice. This is certainly taught to all bridge players when they are learning to play duplicate, and is unquestionably one of the ways to discover if a bid has not been alerted. Question: Given Glen’s competency level (as posted on his Player Profile), if his opponents had made a call in contradiction to their posted CC, is it likely that Glen would have perusde the CC and be able to place a call to the TD to report this infraction? Answer: What do you think? I’d bet yes. Question: Did Glen have any difficulty getting support from the TD for this call or in later rounds? Answer: No, Glen’s call was answered promptly and correctly. In later rounds, Glen was busy making immediate use of silly TD’s generous contribution of dumb remarks to make a posting to the forums leaving him less time to make calls to the TD. Question: Will the TD exchange additional chat with Glen after completing his calls in the future? Answer: Duh! What do you think? J In conclusion, it was wrong of me to imply that I would not answer, assess and address all calls on the basis of the facts and the law. My personal expectations and blonde moments aside, though relatively new to ACBL Directing, I am generally found to be fair and reasonable. Tongue in cheek with Fond Regards :P , Frosty (the unsympathetic TD) PS Rule 82D – It is the responsibility of the Director to be unsympathetic to highly skilled players who enjoy the game of “GOTCHA” as much as they do Bridge.

When doing pairs - if you are not allergic to the idea - use the Survivor format. If people KNOW they risk being cut it somehow changes their attitudes. They are less willing to mouth off. If I get one who just doesn't shut up after I've answered any questions (often with nothing more than "scroll back in the chat for the instructions that answer your question"), I simply change them to ENEMY status which I have set to mute so that I see no more of their chat. Then they can rant to their heart's content while I finish serving the rational players. I often counsel overly disruptive players by telling them that I have never yet had a tournament won by someone who spent their time griping. Don't give up hosting tournies ..... just FIDO (forget it and drive on) !! Frosty :-)

In addition to Gweny's requests, I would very much like to see the TD's chat appear in reverse so that it stands out. A consistent problem is that the players cannot pick out the TD chat from the rest of the chat and instructions/explanations are missed more than they are noticed. TD's try to communicate with the players, but our chat tends to blend in with all the rest and is difficult to recognize if you are focused on bidding/playing. Some of us use the suit symbols to delineate our chat, but players use these as well which further muddles the issue. At a former bridge site where I worked, the TD chat line appeared with black background and white letters. This would be SO helpful and - I suspect - not so difficult!! And it doesn't use another color :D !! Still want call lists that do not pop up and want TD tools needed during the tourney to be available on the Tournament Lobby. Also want time clock on tourney lobby screen..... see prior suggestions. Thanks :D Frosty

I agree with Paul, Brandal, in terms of value - the donation of your time as a TD is worth much more than is suggested in this thread. Do not measure the value of your contribution by what you see here - these posters are very SMALL minority of the BBO community. They are not interested in being part of the solution - they prefer to polish their credentials by being part of the problem. Yes, there are a few who will point out which books TD's can read to improve their skills, but no - those folks won't be offering their services to give someone else a chance to play while the so-called incompetent TD's are off digesting the booklists du jour. Nor will they offer to train TD's in the skills that they find so sorely lacking. They prefer to criticize. Personally, I cannot help but be underwhelmed by the "expertise" of posters who are so condescending. Their lack of character overshadows any bridge knowledge and/or skill level they may possess. Apparently, the first time they held a deck of cards, a complete understanding of all past, current and future facets of the game came to them in a blinding flash. They haven't had to learn the game like we common folk. I pray that it will never happen LOL - but if I ever get to be as "GOOD" as these posters - somebody shoot me!!!! Frosty

Agreed - CC's in ACBL Indy's is not the issue - its the Pairs games that matter. I've run into this challenge in almost every ACBL tournament I've played it. The TD announces that a CC is required but does not enforce this policy. I've called TD's several time's because of missing CC's when I need one to understand the Opps bidding and the only thing that's happened is that they've been "reminded" to post one. An even worse situation is when the opps have no profiles and no CC's and nothing changes even after the TD is called and they are warned. IMN2BHO - if CC's are required, this needs to be enforced. Players with no profile who fail to file a CC should be removed. Frosty :)

Lacking the "Y" chromosome, my solution to ranking is much simpler. If the TD is good, play in his/her games. If not - don't. Adding another layer of administrivia is just tedious. Frosty :)

Helllllooooooooooooo!!!! Did any of you happen to read Gwen's post?????? IMN2BHO, there is an inherent condescension here that precludes any real resolution. First of all - there is a LARGE group of bridge players who will never function on a highly intellectual level. This is not their goal. This group, while they may be interested in, and may work towards better bridge skills, are not likely to ever embrace the level of expertise or complexity that is apparent in this thread. Believe it or not, they play predominantly for the fun of it. Many of the BBO TD's, myself included, volunteer to serve player of all levels. In doing so, we must come to some middle of the road approach that makes our events enjoyable for a mix of players/skills. While your system may be mathematically sound and intellectually logical - it may appear to others as if you are speaking a foreign language, so you'd better be prepared to make lots of alerts. WBF and ACBL policies notwithstanding - I just want players in my tournaments to do the best they can with the skills they have with the end result being that they get something out of the tournament - even if that is only 1.5 hours of fun. Gweny is absolutely right - frankly its disingenuous to criticize the skills of the TD's if you are unwilling to do anything to contribute to improvement. It smacks of making yourself seem large by comparison when you de-edify others this way. Frosty :D

I am glad you took the opportunity to vent, Fred! I'm a fence sitter regarding the "Pay" tournies. I don't feel that TD's should be charging - rather, just as yellow's and stars are chosen, I think BBO should have reserved the right to determine who is eligible to charge and who isn't. But I also understand why BBO didn't go that route since the policy is largely one of self-determination. I respect both BBO's position and the right of other TD's to charge if they choose. I play in pay tournies if that's when I'm playing and free tournies if that's when I'm playing. The fee is reasonable, and what BBO provides for the players is certainly worth more than I'll spend at BBO. I frankly don 't care who gets what part of it. (Hmmm - it occurs to me that maybe I don't have a pulse afterall LOL). That having been said, I am flabberghasted that people would be so utterly devoid of common courtesy as to call you on your toll free # (free to them - not to you) for such petty issues. Peoples' manners never cease to amaze even me! I think you should change your #. Why have a # where BBO members can reach you except for those you specifically designate - you are WAY too kind! Besides - isn't the negative Email enough?? Here's the bottom line - Fred/Uday/Sherry and the yellows that work so hard - do NOT owe us anything. It's the other way around. We, the BBO members - though apparently ungrateful - are on the owing end of this bargain. We've been provided a technologically advanced, responsive and fully functional site at no charge to us. For this, the founders and worker bees have recieved a disproportionate amount of "guff" rather than the appreciation which they all richly deserve! The player community may never fully realize the hours the core group commits to BBO. When I was young enough to do it, I had a career designing, building, enhancing and supporting new computer systems - 80 hours work weeks were common. Not quite so far back there was a brief tour of duty as one of a player group administrating the online bridge site that AOL abandonned - a genuinely thankless task. I don't need any more peeks in the window to know what the core group at BBO has sacrificed. I guaran-darn-tee you, most of us couldn't and wouldn't do it. For those of my fellow BBO members who don't want to play in pay tournaments - I don't see the benefit in biting the hand that feeds you. No one is required to patronize the pay tournies. Why not just make your own choices and forego the criticism? There are plenty of free events still available. I was going to suggest that BBO members should be charged commensurate with their inclination to criticize/gripe/whine, but thought better of it since I might not be able to afford it LOL B) Thanks for all you do for us - Yellows, Fred, Uday and Sherry. Frosty :rolleyes:

Most of us read but didn't vote because we can't imagine anyone WANTING to watch us LOL!!! Frosty :)

Honestly - so long as its manageable, I'd really prefer adjustments be done by a TD. IMHO Streamlining the other administrative functions would make adjustments easier. In fast paced games, every extra keystroke can make a big difference in keeping a tourney moving. Usually, 2-4 adjustments per TD each round is manageable. As one of few free games, and usually alone in my time slot with 40-60 tables/7 minute Boards I often do lots more. Frankly the multiple keystrokes and pop-ups that block the screen result in lots more bad words from me than having to do adjustments LOL. SUGGESTION: For adjustments, try finding and minimizing all the BridgeVu screens for pending adjustment in your task bar. This makes them available for you to review as other tasks permit, and they're less likely to be forgotten. If needed, you can switch back and forth from the BridgeVu of the Board to the Lobby to private chat questions to the players involved, without going to a table. Even when there are complaints in mid-hand that need review, you can ask the players to finish the hand and review it this same way, after they are done and you are able to see all the cards. AS LONG AS I'M BEING GREEDY .... I would like to see the table #'s of any tables that didn't finish a round appear somewhere for a few moments after a round change. A new entry on the current TD tool pop-up, or enhanced use of the existing status option, is fine. The information is already captured with the round status, but there is only room for 4 -5 of the table numbers to display. And, if the TD happens to 1) click the table button, 2) click the status option, 3) click the EXECUTE button (count em - 3 keystrokes) one second too late, the information is gone, (another arguement for round clocks on the TD's view of the tourney lobby). Maybe it makes sense to leave the finishing round information up in the status pop-up for 30-60 seconds or so, with a notation that the round is over and ALL the table#'s that didn't finish (within reason). There isn't an urgent need to watch the clock at the beginning of a round, but there is a need to know who didn't finish the previous one. The round clock could switch back to current status after 30-60 seconds. (SEE - ask for what you want in the most inconvenient way and then suggest an easy solution ...... more likely to net results LOL)!!! Gweny - I'm sure you told me that Fred and Uday can do anything ;)!!!! LOL!!! Most of the suggestions provide information that is already captured or available. The messiest part is providing a new screen view for active TD's and interfacing the information. Just a matter of whether it's worth it given the bigger picture. Might not be :) It's really dangerous to leave me alone with my ideas LOL - they multiply! Frosty

ooooooo - more good ideas!!! I really like the idea of changing the color of the tables that are finished. And yes, a round clock for each section would be best - I have some implementation ideas on this as well. One thing tho - I'm not suggesting that there be a separate window so much as I'm asking for a modified view of the same window we normally see. This would automatically be shown to the active TD's instead of the screen we currently see - much as we see the table button as green while the players do not. If the 3 new Call lists and Tools section are added, other than changing the table to indicate that it is finished, everything else would be visible at all times from the tourney lobby as additions/modifications to the screen view we currently see. Frosty :blink:

Tim - While you personally may not have missed the "point" a second time - it has been missed more than once in this thread. The "point", as I've explained, is the merit of an individual identifying and pursuing any goal of self improvement. The "point" is that it doesn't matter if YOU value the goal. The "point" is, and was, that belittling someone else's values simply because you don't share them accomplishes a grand total of nothing. It is simply condescension. It's not as if this were a moral, economic or political issue. How is it that anyone benefits by your poo-pooing someone's accomplishments? We got that you don't give a rip about MP's, (and to a great extent I happen to share your lack of interest in MP's) ...... but that ISN'T the point :D. This young man has accomplished something that he is entitled to be proud of regardless of whether you and I aspire to it or not. Frosty B)

I vote for a waiting list! Even when my tourney's are full and I've released offline pairs, I invariably have sitouts or otherwise lose players. I would much rather give someone the chance to play based on the order they attempted to sign up than to lose the tables or put in subs arbitrarily. Frosty

Along this same line, there are several previous posts regarding TD calls and better ways to manage them. Indulge me as I elaborate on these ideas which involve the addition of a different "view" of the tourney lobby/table screens for the active TD's. The addition of CALL COLUMNS on the TD's view of the Tournament lobby screen: The column on the current lobby view titled SCORING would be appropriated to provide a usable area (and the scoring method would be listed just once in the heading margin with the tourney #, etc.). Both the Kibs and the Table # columns would be narrowed to provide the additional space needed for 3 new call columns on the TD's view of the screen. #1 Column Heading = Need TD: Requests for help/ruling/arbitration/instruction should fall into this most pressing category and be listed by the Table# only with multiple calls from the same table being blocked. As an example, the display might read "4" meaning that a director needs to come to Table 4. The player's explanation when calling for help/ruling/arbitration/instruction should NOT pop-up when the call is made. Rather it should appear in the chat when the TD arrives at the table along with the announcement of the TD's appearance and the player who who called. This is the point in time that the information is needed. It also becomes part of the chat log for reviews when needed if handled this way. #2 Column Heading = Sub Reqs: Requests for help with missing or stuck players should appear in a separate list with mulitple requests from the same table being blocked. The nick of the missing/stuck player should be required. Display for the TD should list the Table# and nick of missing/stuck player. Not every missing/stuck player requires a visit to the table and this listing would provide the TD with the option to deal with the problem without visiting the table. As an example, the display might read "Frosty(15)" indicating that I was missing or stuck at Table 15. No need to list who called,since this will show in the chat if the TD opts to visit the table. #3 Column Heading = Adj/Board: Adjustment calls should only allow for the player to list his nick and the Board #. Long explanations are only an impediment to getting the adjustment done and the TD will ask for information he/she needs from which ever player(s) has(have) the answers to any questions that arise. Adjustment requests should show on the list with name of player requesting and the Board # in the order received with multiple requests from the same table being blocked. As an example "Frosty(2)" in the list could indicate that I have requested an adjustment for Board 2. It isn't necessary to alter the players' view of the lobby screen - rather present to the active TD's an automatically souped up view of the lobby screen. The complete lists should be visible by all the TD's listed on the tourney and each time a TD takes a call, they should be able 1) to click on a new call to show it is being worked, and 2) click (or double click) on the entry to remove it once resolved. I would suggest that the calls being worked simply change in color or be highlighted in some way to show that a TD has responded. This way all the open calls and their status are visible to all the TD's and can be addressed with the fewest keystrokes in the most timely manner possible. Finally, the TD's most frequently used tools (subbing, adjusments, status) - as opposed to those that are not acutally used during a tourney - should always be open on the TD's view of the tournament lobby and/or tables screens so that there is no need for the repetitive keystrokes to constantly open and close the bigger list. This should be structured to use the top section of the chat box ( where you might otherwise view the table or tourney listings) so that it does not block the table screen or table listing area as the current pop-up screen does. A round clock should be added to this area as well. If anyone wants specific ideas about how this could be layed out, just ask. Obviously this would require some further refinements to the Call options the players see and some re-education, but the increased ability of the TD to respond to effectively meet the player's needs in a timely manner would be well worth the growing pains! Could also reduce the early onset of arthritis in TD's hands/fingers. :) Frosty

Tim - again you miss the point :) Frosty