m00036

Unfortunately the answer is that it's not easy. BBO's only integrated teams feature uses the old Flash version and is currently restricted to trial events only. At present, therefore, most teams events should go via BBO's Team Matches feature. Depending on the number of tables, the number of directors and how used to the BBO software you are will determine how easy it would be to run a session in a teams format. Since the results would have to be compiled offline anyway, the fact that BBO doesn't provide VP scores isn't an additional problem as such. If players are not charged for playing, then you can use BBO's platform without charge, download the results and convert them into an ACBL format (again depending on how familiar you are with the options in BBO and ACBLScore). If players are charged, then BBO have asked for a cut since 1st September but there is no easy way to arrange that at present. In any case, BBO Points are not currently awarded. You might be better off therefore running an IMP Pairs session in the interim while BBO put together that option, or instead look at alternate platforms which specialise more in teams play.

Yes it's frustrating when players take that approach but ultimately it's the TD's job to award a score that is fair to both sides based on the play that was completed (they are not breaking the laws by not playing quickly, even if they have broken another law by being the cause of the initial delay). Arguably the TD should add time to the round to ensure that the board is completed, and then apply a warning or procedural penalty after the event. A weighted score should have been awarded in this case using an offline scoring system. The problem is with communication - there is no easy way to tell a player to choose your finesse on BBO compared to face-to-face; There may well also be connection issues that are not the player's fault, and any player in that situation would play out their winners first before committing. It's just the nature of online bridge. Anyway my award would, if I'm not allowed to extend the round, be something like 60% for -1 and 40% for =. If you only use BBO scores then it depends on the tournament regulations (since it wouldn't be following the laws of bridge), but you may well just choose a score from the traveller (even if it's unrelated to 3NT) that is closest to the MP score they would have got with that weighting, giving any generosity to the non-offending side. 3NT-1 is a tempting score to award but has very little justification (unless those are the rules of your event, in which case that would be absolutely fine).

One player registered with a robot because her partner couldn't get online in time. 1 hour later her partner regained connection and wanted to join, but the error message displayed said "Cannot sub you in, this seat has already been taken" (something like that). I don't know why that would appear and I've never had an issue like that before - I don't know whether it's to stop people from paying $0.25 for a robot and then having a human partner? Or maybe just a bug in BBO.

A clocked tournament follows a standard Mitchell or Howell. The next round starts when the clock expires or all tables have finished, whichever comes sooner. In unclocked tournaments, the clock is purely used as a guide and has no effect on the movement. When 3 or 4 tables have finished, those tables move to the next round with a random movement to allocate pairs. This continues for the next 3 or 4 tables etc. until all tables have moved to the next round. It means that the faster tables complete the event more quickly but results will be biased as you will play against either the faster or slower pairs (assuming that slow pairs are less experienced, the best slow pair will score very highly despite not being in the top half of the field on merit alone, as a very simple example). You're not stuck in the same speed group for the entire tournament necessarily but the first 3 tables to move for Round 2 are likely to be in the fastest 3 tables for the next round since they start earlier and are quicker etc.

Table numbers are only indicative of BBO rankings if the tournament is using a swiss movement. This feature has long been requested, along with TDs having access to travellers during the event (which players have access to but TDs don't). It's due in part to BBO having been around for so long which means that some features are fundamentally separate from others (I presume anyway), which therefore makes it hard to give TDs access to travellers even though it should be straight-forward.

This isn't a perfect approach though; I had a sub player last week who played 11 boards before bidding 7NTxx on the 12th. They disconnected and I put a robot in. I then find that BBO had tried to automatically reseat them 4 boards later when they came online so I had to kick them out again... I'm not sure there's a better solution but it's not always perfect (admittedly the FYI reseat instruction is very useful, thanks for that!).

I believe that only applies to free tournaments; The end of board (or immediate if the player is dummy) reseat is automatic for all Virtual Club events.

That's not the case in a Virtual Club environment though where everyone knows everyone from face-to-face games. Lots of VC players are only on BBO to meet up with friends and have a social game so have no incentive to cheat to win (some wouldn't know how to kibitz at another table normally anyway). I agree that some partnerships do have one strong and one weak player so switching them around could give them an advantage in that case (subbing a robot in could also benefit that pair in a similar way), so I would leave it up to director discretion and ask the players at the table if they have any problems.

TCR refers to your tournament completion rate. Your TCR is based on your last 60 days and you must have completed at least 10 tournaments during this time. If you haven't played that many tournaments, look out for free tournaments without restrictions (e.g. Free Automated Fun) and make sure you don't leave. If you leave a tournament before it ends, this counts as a withdrawal and will reduce your TCR. Tournaments tend to ban players with low TCRs because they ruin the game for everyone else; When you enter a tournament, you commit to completing that tournament and failure to do is against BBO rules. All the details can be found at https://www.bridgebase.com/help/v2help/completion_rates.html.

The problem of automatic replacement/reentry is that not all clubs will want it so it has to be added in as an option for TDs which takes extra time to implement. My clubs would not want such a feature but I know in larger BBO tournaments it works very well so depends on the situation. Anyway on the point of the thread, you can use the Reseat Player command to sub players back in without having to know where they were before.

Frustratingly no (as far as I can tell). When 2 robot pairs are required, I tend to record the movements of each robot pair and their opponents so that they can be matched up (Mitchells and Howells at least have clear movements but table numbers are not recorded after the event so you have to do this in real time). You can also trial and error so that the percentages line up of course. It may be that there is a way which I haven't found yet though. Yes robots will finish the round in next to no time. They will always play the same cards in the same situation but the crucial part is that the bidding may be subtly different, meaning that the situation is indeed different. Robots assume their opponents are playing their system, so even something as simple as a 1NT open showing 15-17 at one table and a return to 1NT (showing 1NT but robots interpreting as 12-14) could affect the defence as the probability of declarer having certain cards will change. It helps to explain why robot defence can be so good at times and so frustrating at other times (e.g. the robot will hardly ever play you for points you "can't" have if there is a "legitimate" line of defence available, but it may just be that the robot and the humans are playing different systems).

Yes.

A simple 1-5 rating would be great. Human subs are far more enjoyable to play against than robots if they are pleasant and friendly like you, but equally robots are far better in comparison to a rude sub who may leave early or make horrible comments at the table. Assuming the TD ratings are honest and reliable, it would be a great feature; Not everyone plays 2/1 and not everyone wants to play against robots anyway.

No announcements yet, and only pairs events will be affected. Therefore team matches will remain free of charge (as long as the organisation involved doesn't charge for entry offline as this is against BBO's terms).

Robots cost $0.25 to partner and anyone (assuming the option is enabled in director settings) can choose to play with one on their own accord. The director would have to add the robot pair to fill the sitout as normal. Obviously you can reimburse the host how you like after the session but they will be charged the standard fee (+$0.25) when registering.