Keene_JP

Could the entry of playing time be changed to allow a non-integer # minutes / board? either of: a) allow decimal places in the current minutes / bd b) remove time per board and replace with time per round (presumably as an integer). Note: this has already been discussed under an earlier thread.

All -- i will be posting various items on my wish list: one at a time to facilitate individual discussion. IF what i wish is already possible, please explain ! IF not, and if you would like it also, please speak up. Stay tuned.

Is it possible / safe to change certain game parameters (# boards; # minutes/board) in the middle of a game?

BBO allows you to enter a fractional time per board but then rounds that to nearest integer which seems to be what it keeps. We would like to run 6.5 per board => 13 min per 2 board round. SO -- how does Speedball get 3 boards in 14 minutes (it is 14, not 15) => 4.67 per board?

will do. wasn't sure if a more 'formal' channel existed. I will post them, one at a time s.t. individual items can be separately discussed.

As a VACB TD i have developed a small list of feature i would like to have added. What is the mechanism for communicating these to someone at BBO / ACBL ? Should i just post them here? I imagine other TDs would like to have some of them as well.

confused. today we had 30 tables -- was automatically split into 2 sections each of 15. I thought i had earlier read somewhere in BBO docs that 15 was max size. If can go beyond 15 tables per section by using this hack, then i understand. For example, for smaller game, 16 tables is a pain if it splits into (2) sections of 8. Much nicer at full 16.

From BBO upgrade announcement: Write +SECTIONSIZE=X+ in tournament description. (Where X is the number of tables). Not sure why i would want this -- max size is still 15 tables? If 30 tables, i could now split into 3 sections of 10 instead of (2) at 15 ? but why would i ?

Is it necessary to have passed the test and be certified by ACBL as director at the club level? LONG ago, the ACBL stated that (perhaps temporarily) it would not be. Our ACBL is expanding its games and we are thinking about another TD.

per ACBL recently: One more bit of good news…while this may not happen for a few more days, if you have a robot pair in your game, they will be marked as ineligible to receive masterpoint awards. Details? If robot pair places 1st and human pair places 2nd, does that pair receive MPs based on 1st or 2nd place finish ??

Thanks. No, i was never given this link by the TD who started our VACB -- i don't think he had gotten it either. Doesn't matter. Some questions still: 1) re "description strings" -- is there a comprehensive list anywhere? This article described +allavail+ and those for Howell, but that's all. i know there are others because our 299-er game uses +mplimit. If there are others, perhaps they would be useful. 2) the options for setting a break between rounds appear only in the section on Howell. I have elsewhere here seen comment that they can only be used with Howell -- not Mitchell. Is this so? If so, it seems like a strange an unnecessary limitation ? Thanks again.

In the description field, the TD may included various options (BBO seems to lovingly refer to these as hacks). These are demarcated by plus signs, and include things for running a Howell, scheduling a break, setting a MP limit, etc, Is there a list of all of these somewhere, or does a TD have to stumble over them by luck in some of these posts? If 2 or more are used do they have to be strung together (+howell+rounds9+) or may they be entered separately (+howell+ +rounds9+)? Can a break after a round be set for any type of game or only for a Howell? Finally, what is the meaning of +allavsail+ which apparently has to be used (so we were told)? Thanks on advance!

BBO will break a Tourn into multiple sections when table count is sufficiently high. What are the details here? What is max # in a single section? does the TD have any control over this?

Would you please explain this new tool? I have never heard of it; could be useful. If you prefer, email me: keenebridgeclub@gmail.com Thanks !

as director i've received notifications from the system re an incomplete board. by the time i get to the table, it has been adjusted to something like 'making', 'down 1'. etc. I'm the only director -- must be GIB doing this. SO -- does GIB first give A== and then later review ? Confused.

Fred -- very good article. My question relates to incident when i was directing VACB game yesterday. On an incomplete hand, GIB assigned A== and NS complained. Investigation revealed that only 4 1/2 tricks had been played. Even though declarer was very good player and outlined what he would have done (perhaps benefiting from seeing all hands afterward) i felt that with 8 1/2 tricks to go, there was too much uncertainty and let the GIB ruling stand. Was this wrong? Is there a required minimal # tricks played before adjustments other than A== should be made? In reductio ad absurdum: one side reaches, say 3NT, and opening lead is made -- then -- that's all. Time limit reached. Given the lead, say there are 9 obvious off the top tricks and no hope for more. What should be done? Thanks in advance for your answer -- i've caught a lot of flak over this, including be called "lazy". -=-= Keene_JP