New kind of survivor tourney

[hotShot]

There are a lot of players here that like to play fast. So why not offer a survivor tourney with a speed based cut.

If e.g. 90% of the tables are finished, the unfinished tables are excused and the rest moves on.

[mink]

There should be a minimum amount of time for each round, however, as it would be silly to exclude a table after 5'30'' with only one trick left to be played. And, not the slowest tables but the slowest pairs should be excluded - this would require measuring the time each player uses, of course. For the fast pairs at slow tables who are allowed to continue, the hand could be finished by robots.

 

Karl

[hotShot]

I thought about a minimum amount of time, but i think the thrill of this speed based tourney is, that everybody has to play as fast as possible. A major aspect of this thrill is that you don't know how fast the others play. Maybe instead of the round clock the percentage of finished tables could be displayed. At rates of 80-90% you will take most of player with average speed to the next round.

Since all tables play the same boards, complexity is not an issue.

 

Since I can see no way to determine which of the pairs was slower, the slow table must be excluded compleatly. There will be some injustice involved, but i think people will accept that. I would prefer to be excluded once in a while when opps play to slowly, if i don't have to wait each round or at the end of the tourney.

[ducky_rh]

Honoring fast play over deliberate thoughtful bridge is a little like going to a sushi bar and eating only the wasabi.

 

If seven or eight minutes are allotted per board, why penalize the players who avail themselves of that time in an effort to produce better bridge?

 

People who type "faster pls" when there are three tricks and five minutes left drive me nuts.

 

If anyone wants the trophy for being the fastest player alive, I will not stand in their way...thay may have it. I'd prefer being ranked #131,246 on the list of best bridge players alive. Yes, I know, I have a long way to go.

[mink]

Well Robert, I see our ideas differ completely, and I am on duckys side here.

 

My idea when I read your post was to use the survivor mechanism to give the players an additional reason to play in time. But being bumped out because my opps play slow or because I am just some seconds slower than most of the other tables would be no fun for me.

 

Karl

[hotShot]

Have you tried the mbt's? People playing there at a rate of about 2 min a board, and enjoy it. This type of tourney i suggested is for those who really like it fast.

[Gerben42]

Have you tried the mbt's? People playing there at a rate of about 2 min a board, and enjoy it. This type of tourney i suggested is for those who really like it fast.

 

You think you will win if you take 2 minutes each board?! 15 boards in the 25 minutes is a must, more is desirable (except in situations where you run down the clock)