peterb001

I can't comment on the app, as I've never used it. I would suggest that you try using the website directly through Safari or any other browser, and see if the problem goes away. It is very unlikely that the problem will be fixed anytime soon - the developers are very busy, and it's not a problem that you can replicate at will, which is what would give them a reasonable chance of finding out what is going wrong.

Can you clarify, please. Are you using the BBO app, or a web browser (if so, which one)? Similarly what specifically is your partner using? I only occasionally play on my iPad mini, accessing BBO through Safari, and haven't encountered this problem.

You will see links to them in the pinned HACKS post in this forum.

You are referring to the message in the TD calls list, saying adjustment required, which as you say disappears if the robot automatically adjusts the score on the board. I was referring to the message that appears briefly on your screen when you have successfully manually adjusted a board. I find it very useful to check that my adjustment has been taken, because (at least using the V3 interface via 'players results') the players results that you then see on the screen does not reflect the adjustment - you need to close and re-open the players scores in order to see the updated score, and I prefer not to have to do this.

Just to be clear, the message only appears on your screen if you are logged in as the tournament host (the userid that initially set up the tournament, a Vxxxyyyyyy userid for virtual clubs). The message appears at the bottom right of your screen, then disappears again on its own, similar to the 'tournament has been modified' and 'score has been adjusted' messages that you also need to watch out for at appropriate times.

As soon as the results are uploaded to the results server (currently very soon after tournament completion), anyone can easily see all the travelers using the link https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tarchive.php?m=h&h=BBOuser - where BBOuser is the BBO userid of the user who created the tournament. Click on boards on the appropriate line to see them.

When there is a single section, and especially when playing a standard Mitchell, is there any logic that determines which players will sit NS and which will be EW?

I don't have the technology to check this out, but I would expect that everything will work by accessing the BBO site through the browser. How is he trying to access BBO, and what is the problem that he has?

When we first started to play online as a club, and all sessions were 'friendly' (not counting for anything), we allowed all undos. Once the players became more experienced, and we became a virtual club under the EBU, which has issued their default online regulations (Sky Blue book) which prohibits undos in pairs tournaments, we have moved over to this, and there have been no complaints. And as a director, there are no issues of trying to find out whether it really was a misclick rather than a change of mind.

As barmar has explained, there is no specific time when the final results will be on the results server, though at the moment the transfer is happening fairly quickly. Once the 20 minutes adjusting time is over, you can easily see the travellers by visiting the link http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tarchive.php?m=h&h=BBOhost (where you replace BBOhost with the BBO userid that set up the tournament). Click on boards for the event in question, then check one of the travellers to see if (at least one of) the adjustments you made after the end are included. Once they are, you can tell people that the result is final. I find the best solution is to extend the last round if necessary so that all boards in this round are finished normally, and at the same time make sure that all other adjustments have been made before the tournament finishes, so that the initial results that are uploaded immediately the tournament ends are correct, though I do understand that this is not always possible.

If you read the topic 'game setup hacks' in this forum from a week ago TD forum then you will find the answers.

When someone enters a (paid) tournament, at what point does the system check they have sufficient BBO$ to play? Is it when they enter the tournament, or when the tournament starts? Yesterday our tournament didn't start on time (because of the +allavail+ parameter) but at the time it wasn't clear if this we due to disconnection, or a lack of BBO$. I believe that the BBO$ are only taken when the tournament starts. If there isn't a warning of a lack of funds when someone enters, then I think this would be a good idea for the future.

BBO has an even better option where you can click on the bid made, which asks the bidder to explain the bid as if they had alerted it at the time. So players can protect themselves, without the bidder's partner being any the wiser, and without having to call the director. So the first question to the aggrieved person should be why they didn't 'ask' for an explanation when the bid was made.

From my experience, you always have at least a delay (and regularly nothing ever happening) on the V3 interface if you are already viewing a table or another deal 'underneath' the hand review that you are trying to look at. If first of all you use the 'Home' button to clear the screen, (you can still then use 'view tables' and right click on one of the player's concerned to view 'Player's scores', then click on the relevant line of their scores) then the hand you want appears fairly quickly. And if it doesn't, close it and try again. It is a little hit and miss!!

Of course, you can always load the phrases that you want in BBO's own chat manager, which is available in at least the V2 (flash) and V3 (web page) interfaces. Alternatively you can just create a text file on your computer with the phrases that you want, and save it, then you can just open it up, and copy and paste the phrases that you want.

Having only just started playing bridge on BBO, I have been using the online V3 interface, and I find it is fine. I have since been trained to use the Flash version (V2) for directing, but I find it more clunky and less intuitive than the later version. I also really like the Bridge Solver Chrome Extension for BBO. I also play and direct on my tablet, which only appears to offer V3 online (though the layout is slightly different!!) So I don't know whether this is just being happy with what you are more familiar with, but there doesn't seem to be a large functionality difference between the 2.

I also have this problem finding unfinished boards which have been averaged at the end of a round. I have been told that there are more facilities to see this using the TD screens on the old flash version of the interface, before the round ends, but I haven't yet tried it.

West lead D4. I’m not sure if I would lead a heart away from K against a freely bid 3NT, when partner has run from 1NTx, and can’t have much .... maybe nothing. Nothing was mentioned to me about any action by East to prevent a heart lead, so I presume this wasn’t the case. South said he misplaced the cards based on the explanation, though I think you have to be suspicious that the bidding doesn’t add up, with at least 7 hearts promised by EW. I suspect South finessed JS, and will then struggle after a club return. So based on the responses so far, you all take this as a mistaken explanation, which has damaged NS, and so is worthy of an adjusted score. The next question is how to determine what the adjusted score should be. It is very likely that the auction started 1NT X at every table, so with the varied results you can see that there is no single, obvious sequence.

[hv=pc=n&s=s92haq876dj6c8543&w=s65hkjtda754ckj72&n=sakj4h952dkqt3ca6&e=sqt873h43d982cqt9&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1nd2h2np3nppp]399|300[/hv] EBU regulations. NS is a regular, experienced partnership. EW is an occasional partnership, with no convention card. 1NT was announced as 12 - 14, the double is 15+, primarily for penalties (sorry - I didn't manage to include this information in the diagram). When asked by South, West explained the 2H as natural, showing 5+ hearts. The accurate answer should probably have been 'No partnership agreement'. Many in the club do play this sequence (1NT x 2H) as a transfer to spades. The table result was 3NT-2. At the end, NS claimed they had been damaged by the explanation in the bidding and the play. The double dummy analysis says that NS can make 9 tricks in hearts, and 7 in any other denomination. Actual table results were a very mixed bag. 1NT* = W, 2S -3 E; 3S -1 E; 2NT -3 S; 4H = S; 2NT = N; 1NT +2 N. I made a ruling at the time, but I would like to get some feedback on what should have been done. Thanks

I know a number of not so strong club players who I believe would take out 3NT into 4D on the East hand, even if the 2NT was correctly alerted as unusual, on the grounds that they really want to play in a minor ('telling the same story twice', as a bridge writer once called it). It's not clear what West originally thought the 2NT meant, and whether that changed following the 4D bid. Certainly if expecting a minor 2 suiter, 3NT is a poor bid unless West erroneously believes they will be playing the contract (having made the first 'genuine' NT bid), and if this was the case, then it's a fair gamble.

Going back to the original question, my reading of it is that the contract is being played by East, in which case East has to decide on any lead requirement without any input from West. So it may not be obvious to East to ask for a spade lead. If on the other hand, West asks for QS, and then still bids the slam even if East denies it, then it will be fairly obvious to East to ask for a trump lead?

I don't agree that this is an encrypted lead, based on the definition. Are you saying that in a trump contract, partner leads 4S, and you hold an (unbid) 7 card spade suit, so can read it as a singleton (rather than 3rd / 4th best), that this is an encrypted lead - because you can work it out from your hand, but declarer can't? As long as the defenders follow their defined carding agreement in any particular suit, then it is not encrypted.

In this case it's the defenders who gave the incorrect information, so it's Law 20 F 5 (b) (i), and so only at the end of play.

Given that South had previously declined to open, it is also possible that South is wondering whether to protect you on this auction, as you could be much stronger, and stuck for a bid. So I'm not convinced that the hesitation points at any particular suit holding (we may have a fit in spades or diamonds ... or not), and I would protect my honours and lead probably a heart, otherwise a club.

Hi Bud, 1) Although we don't use ACBLscore here, you can cancel the outstanding rounds in the Bridgemates software (but only once all of the results for the last round are in). For us, this automatically concludes the event in Scorebridge. In the Bridgemate control software select the menu option Session, and the sub option ‘close rounds’. In that screen, update the round numbers to close rounds 1 to 9 (if that is correct). This will then close ALL outstanding boards in all of those rounds. NOTE. I have been informed that the Bridgemates may need to be reset (through the TD menu) the next time that they are used. 2) We have various 3/4 Howell movements in our scoring program which are printed off, as for any specific evening we generally play a fixed number of boards, so we select an appropriate movement for that number of tables. The main advantages of using these are (apart from not having to cancel any rounds) that you have more sitting pairs, and there are fewer boards in play, so you also get a 'fairer' result as all pairs will play all boards (unless there is a sit out). This becomes even more important if you only have a few tables. In your 5 table scenario, with 9 rounds of 3 boards, some boards will only be played 3 or 4 times if you drop the last 2 rounds. HTH Peter