intentionel disconnects(i.D)

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

just a poll to get an overview on community thinking of this problem, if u dont find your answer , feel free to add a replie to this . i voted for the record for option one(bbo does enough to trie and stop this) i wanted to have possiblity to make combination with choice that tds shoud be more actif in reporting these players.first poll i created, hope i done it ok and also hope to get some response to this becuase this really is a topic that upsets people and effects tournaments i feel

 

 

greetings marc

[inquiry]

Intention is a hard thing to tell... Ok, if a person presses the "x" and leaves that is clear. But if a person is disconnected while playing, how does one determine intention.

 

I was playing the other day, and my favorite partner was declaring less than a brilliant contract. I was suffering along with him, maybe at like trick 2, when my silly wife picked up the phone in the other room (yes i still live in the dark ages of dial up)... This broke my connection.

 

This could have been inferred as "intentional" as it had all the hallmarks. A bidding misunderstand, a horrible contract (lucky this wasn't a tourmment.. .I do warn her during those time). I could not get back on right away, because she needed to make the phone call and to log on to say I was logging off, seemed silly. 15 minutes later, I logged on, found my partner, and continued playing.

 

Some people have bad connections. They should not play in tournments perhaps, but I don't know how you tell an intentional disconnect from an unplug the phone or someone pick up a different line and break the connection. If you guys have a magic way to tell the difference, I would love to hear it.

 

Ben

[csdenmark]

I strongly support rude people to be banned. I dont care for how long - I think they will never come back once they have been banned.

 

Said that - I think we need to be sure it is intentionally. This means - we who lives in the western part of our civilization must pay attention to the heritage from the cold war causing poor infrastructure in general and regarding electronics too to Eastern Europe and whole Asia.

 

Our standards for acting against poles, bulgarians, indians, chinese etc. must be different than those for french, italians, scandinavians, canadians and americans.

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

 

 

well in most cases (yellows) can check if its a bad connection or a "naughty" leave and when u see a very bad contract, report it and u in the majority of cases u have someone not playing it fair.

[inquiry]

well in most cases (yellows) can check if its a bad connection or a "naughty" leave and when u see a very bad contract, report it , its like 200%sure its intentionel.

Well, bad contract and "naughty leave" does not = 200% sure intentional leave. I repeat my story from this past weekend. I was playing merrily along with my favorite online partner, mishovnbg. We got to bad 5♥x contract and I got disconnect quite innocently by my wife picking up the phone. By your standards, I would be judged guilty and bannished (or got one of my three strikes).

 

Now, having said this, I guess I will go ahead and join this century and order DSL, to avoid the wayward phone use by others in the household, but I think attitudes like "This must be" intentional disconnect is misguided. What I would prefer is that players with bad connections refrain from online tournment play. There is a huge difference it telling someone "until you get a better connection, don't play in my tournment" if they have a problem with disconnects or slow play, versus "I know you are abandoning my tournments on purpose and thus don't ever come back."

 

The first statement presumes no "guilt" on the part of the player, it is simply a statement that slow play due to poor connections (and/or frequent disconnects) is not acceptible. The second presumes the player is evil (they may of course be, in fact most of them may be, but I hate to see one honest person branded dishonest). As a TD, you of course can run your events anyway you see fit (within guidelines of course). But I would hate to see a group of TD making up an "evil list" and banning players for dishonesty. But note, I am perfectly fine with banning them for routine poor connections... But this second case can eventually get fixed when they find a better connection, the first case of course, should be more or less permanent.

 

Ben

 

As an aside, I do have a intentional disconnect story I will tell you about. A player left, came back, and was sucked back into the tourney. They left, came back (while I was now looking for replacement). Then they complained to me that everytime they leave and come back, they are getting sucked back in. And ordering me to replace them because their partner is an idiot. Ok... here was my example of a clear "disconnect'. I have had others ask me to sub them out, because of the same reason. IF you sub them, is this an intentional disconnect? Same work for you, so I would say yes. What if, instead of attacking their partner, they ask to be substituted for explaining they just developed a migraine, or their child called and needs to be picked up unexpectedly from school? Do you need a note from the doctor or school?

[csdenmark]

well in most cases (yellows) can check if its a bad connection or a "naughty" leave and when u see a very bad contract, report it , its like 200%sure its intentionel.

No Marc - a bad contract informs you of nothing else than something you would never have dreamed of doing yourself!

 

"children and bridgeplayers are to be handled with care" or ?????

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

 

lol, mmmmmmm, just telling the statistics on that, i often get a "p is no expert, he is novice"then u get call, go to table a round after and u see that player offline, ra ra, coud this be intentional or not, and sure this will happen 1 or twice a century for the example u are referring too, just like evry courthouse has if flaws as well, we i think are trying to be as fair as we can, and the 3 stirkes out is just an option of how we can handle this . and after your first ban or warning , if correct or not you are as the saying goes a warned man/woman(counts for 2) and can take proper actions, same for the very poor connections, why even bother to play in tourneys when u always are subbed out beats me in the first place. my points just is , i host 4/5 hours a day and think i have done some seruios thinking about this and also a little bit of experience , when i go to host for somebody else i get a lot of tds that say me:always the same whit that"xxxx" player and well he s listed in mine long time, think i know lots of players with bad habits of leaving and players with bad connection, as i told before, i first add comment to their profile, second i send a mail, third i report to bbo, so in my case ,3 strikes=six when im not sure so am i patient or not?, dont like the replie that every one can host the way they see fit suggesting i would point fingers very easy. i see players going offline(after bad contract), then returning 2 , 3 times to check if they already have been subbed, then i report immediatly and list them at once, its just not fair for the poor sub who comes in with a bad contract to play . i myself do a lot of subbing to help fellows td, maybe i sujest that u try this once for a day and see what leavers hand u when they fell is time to leave and returne seconds later to register in the next tourney. just want to say i maybe give the wrong intention when i said 200% but this gets to me,

 

 

 

 

greetings marc

p.s as far as my quote is under question, plaese its not, dont jump to conclusions after one topic where i didnt make myself as clear as i shoud, hope this is sufficient for those who never been in my tourneys and thefore judje me on the things i wrote and write in the forum

[csdenmark]

All that warning - strikes etc. is good for nothing. The rules to apply to are all normal standard for decent behavior responsible to other human beings you are dealing with. Either the action is to be reported or not mentioned at all. - If this once in a while may lead to a mistake - I think we all can give an apology and correct the mistake.

 

You have a clear case if someone is disconnected and just try to continue with something else without making an excuse to tournament director. You have a clear case if a pair disconnects and maybe a few other situations. But from scoreboard you can see nothing - and that will never provide you a clear or even a good case.

 

Tournament directors also are of many kind of missing quality. You simply can see so from their set ups. Tournaments of 3-6 boards makes no sense. Silly names neither. Those registering for such kind of tourneys expose themselves to vulnerability.

 

Marc the flexible set-up is 'unclocked, allow undo'. Then all finish in their own speed and they have an option for correction themselves of mistakes. Another problem I located was missing alerts/convention cards/information. Such is especially needed for players with no knowledge of artificial systems and/or if hard language problems is the reason. I created a few web-sites as quick guides for defending a few systems. You will be welcome to use them if they can help you.

 

Quick guide for defense against Polish Club: http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/qpol.msnw

 

Quick guide for defense against Precision: http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/qprec.msnw

[Gerardo]

We usually can tell if a disconnection is done by the user, or not.

[csdenmark]

Very nice Gerardo! I assume you have access to information about which kind of connection(dial-up, broadband, satellite etc.) and whether connection has weakened before a disconnection happened.

 

To deal with this problem is a core part of the BBO "rules for this site". The topic is a constant problem at main bridge club too. With the addition that you here can leave a table and just go to another table. I would really like to see an automatization of enforcing obedience to these important and frequent violated basic rules.

 

I also assume we now can conclude that bad score is no indication whether intentional disconnection has taken place or not. From scoring you will be able see a reason for a deliberate disconnection - but that is a quite different story. As it is a basic obligation for a tournament director to create an environment for fair and comfortable competition - unintended bad scoring will very often need to be assessed as insufficient quality by the set-up/handling done by tournament director(s). - I think it will be for another thread to deal with such.

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

 

well im not going to run "unclocked events" , my tourneys attract loads of players in the form that it is now, why on earth woud a change a populair thing, we had a meeting yesterday with several other td, and this i.d was mentioned there too, i 1m not going to make this and endless discussion but, the vast majority of i.d has to do with scoring bad results, not with a wife that pickup a telephone, when we send out mails, we get replies such as, i dint know this was policy on bbo, well, i know for a fact that bbo(fred uday) dont like this things, second , the ones who are doing it bid like crazy, are set , leave and move on to another tourney and do the same thing,this effects overall score must say we check now almost every red dot, i dont look at the score or anything, most when u come a at table, three players say, he run , he shoud be banned from bbo, how rude, they even follow that player and tell me after 1 minute where he is playing next.this upsets people and isnt fair for tourneyresults, subs, partners, opps ,tds. and what gerardo said is a fact they see wheter or not a member closed or got disconnected due to connection faillure, so your example woudnt be judged as i.d and therefore no action woud be taken, only thing that is not allowed is when the enduser CLOSES BBO WINDOW.

 

 

 

greetings marc

[inquiry]

the vast majority of i.d has to do with scoring bad results, not with a wife that pickup a telephone.... only thing that is not allowed is when the enduser CLOSES BBO WINDOW.

I thought I had expressed my opinion and was finished with this thread, but since my example is brought up again and Gerardo's example of the BBO yellows can tell if a "disconnect" was done by a user or not, let me address yet one more time my view of the "intentional disconnect" .

 

First to Marc, if you are going to classify "intentional disconnects" as people who click the little red x and leave during play. I have no problem with this specific example. That is clearly "intentional" and I suspect that yellows can diagnoses this behavior very quickly.

 

But other than clicking the "x" how can people "intentionally disconnect"?

 

1) A user can unplug his phone line/cable modem/dsl thingee from the computer

2) A user can pick up a phone extension and knocks themself off line

3) A user can shut down or power off their computer or modem

 

Note, items 1, 2 and 3 can occur on purpose or by accident (and can be caused by the user, or a second party). Let's presume for a minute there was a way for BBO yellows to tell if a phone extention had been picked up knocking the player off line. There is no way to tell if a mad player did it himself to get out of the tourneyment or if it was an accident. And in fact, I would be surprised if there isn't a bundle of ways a disconnect could occur (call waiting use to knock me off), including local service provider problems (this happened to MALUCY in an early tournment I played with him in 2003 before subsitutes in tourneys was added as an option see. http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...indpost&p=6686). I had to sit there for 11 boards (5.5 rounds) without a partner getting average minus after average minus.

 

On a related issue, you didn't address the person who ask the TD to subthem out so they can stop playing in the tourment. Some of these request will be valid, some will be to escape the "bad result" like an intentional disconnect. While being more polite to ask to be substituted, it makes no less work for the director. I consider a person who begs out and then goes and plays in a concurrent tournment or in the main room just as guilty at the person who hits the X.

 

But this brings us back the to the "intent" of a disconnection that I questioned, and the implication that you, marc, are so gifted as to determine intent and (in your model posed by your question), deliver punishment when you adjudacate the "runner" as guilty. So let me deal with this implication in your poll.

 

First, I find the entire poll question completely unnecessary, as the BBO policy is well established and sound. Back in August of last year, before you joined the BBF as a user, the question of tournment jumpers came up in a thread in this very forum entitled, "monitoring misbehaviors" (see http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...p?showtopic=858 ). In that thread, both Fred and Uday made it clear that "tournment jumping" (your intentional disconnect) would not be tolerated. And Uday went so far as to state, "FG and I dislike tourney-jumping and tourney-rudeness, particularly to TDs. I am happy to suspend someone who cannot learn that tourney-jumping is not a good thing. I feel the same way about rudeness in tourneys."

 

The difference in the approach advocated by uday (and supported fully by me), is that if you suspect someone of being a tournment jumper, you report them to abuse@bridgebase.com and they issue the appropriate sanction (if they judge that an offense really occurred). Indeed, the people responsible for banning players in currently is where it belongs with uday at abuse@bridgebase.com and with the official BBO yellows (who can also ban people). This is how it should be. However the implication I get from your poll question is the need to transfer the power for making these decisions from the third parties (uday and yellows) to TD directors who, presumably in this model, can even discuss (gossip, gripe) about players before making their own decision. And yes, a TD decision power is hidden here in your question with the three strikes and you are out concept. This is odd, when in fact, one strike can be enough to convince UDAY (see quote above). But my interpretation of you poll is that you want a TD, or perhaps two TD, to be able to keep count of what they ASSUME TO BE intentional disconnects, and when they presume that the total of jumpings = 3, a player will (magically) be banned based upon their count of offenses.

 

I find four things wrong with this model. First, your statement that if a player leaves after a bad result it is 200% they are quilty of an intentional disconnect. This attitude (200% indeed!!!) shows the presumption of guilt, especially considering I gave a perfectly logical explaination why everytime this happens it doesn't have to be intentional with a person example. Second, I think people anyone (TD or just members) thinks is abusing the rules of the site should be reported to abuse@bridgebase.com or to a yellow. I don't think groups of people should get together and scheme and plot against other members of the site with things like (so-and-so is cheating, or so-and-so is a tournement jumper). Let the method for dealing with problems that is in place work. Simply reporting someone to uday, especially if a yellow confirms it was an inentional closing of a window during tournment play, will likely get them suspended until they at least have a chat with uday. This system works, and if it is not working for you, you are obvioulsy not using it. And finally, other than TD's banning players from their events via the features of the software (excluding certain players), I don't think TD's should have "the power" to issue sanctions or decide who can or can not play on the BBO site. This is a power that should be execrise by Fred and Uday, and their specifically appointed deputies (the yellows). And finally, I find it distateful that a group of players will get together and complain about other players. Be this one private club complaining about another or one group of TD creating a database and tracking "bad actors" in their tournments. If someone is acting out in your tournment, ban them from future events you sponsor, and report them to uday. That is both the appropriate response and is perfectly adequate.

 

So let me end with an example. You running an event. A pick up NS partnership on board 2 has a disasterous auction. North expresses doubt about south's sanity, calls him names, and then abruptly presses the "X" and leaves the event. This is what you do. First, add his name to your list of people excluded from your tournments in the future. Second, report his comments and his clear intentional disconnect to abuse@bridgebase.com (helpful to get a yellow look at how his closing of windows was.. was it a normal windows close?). Third find south a new partner. This guy will never cause problems in your events in the future (you banned him) and will probably at the very least be suspended from BBO for some period of time. What could be simplier and more effective.

 

Ben

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

TOTTALLY MISJUDGING ME, ALL THESE THINGS you say i must do i do, no implement of undertone from me asking power ha ha to bann people, no secret gossip to bann players, just a concerne of what players tell me that its not enough, u becoming personal and accusse me off things i do not!!!!!!!!

when u want to read between the lines , feel free to do so, and when u want to take quotes i already said was misplaced while it wasnt explained proper way, or my english not sufficent to explain, and i dont like you making me look redicoulious when u state that im gifted, I Ask a yellow to check every red dot i find suspicuios and guess what, 99% they just replie to me , player logged off and is reported to yellow forum. the only disconnect again im reffering too is when a player closes bbo and clicks the X. all other things u are making or talking about, if my dog runs over my pc its not an intentionel disconnect,if my server breaks down its not an intentionel disconnect. i have no power and i m not asking power to determine this nor am i suggesting that tds shoud have that, second if all this problems u referring to keep happening , why even enter a tournament, always bad luck when a phone is pickup and,at least i have the guts to come forward with the problems i see in tourney and react to what players tell me is very rude and for the record, i voted first answer in the poll with very strong believe that bbo does enough to thread this and i have sympathy for option that" td dont do enough to report this".ask any yellow or uday if i report to abbuse or not, im sure they will tell you that i do this by the book.sub,report,list for short while(i believe in second chances), i have had several others reading this topic over and their response was my non perfect english is resonsable for some misunderstanding, asl i dont get every thing u said in response but read this very carefully and please dont jump to conclusions when people try to make themselves claer in "your" first and mine third language. thx

[inquiry]

Marc,

 

I did not, at least in my opinion, accuse you of any actions or any ulterior motives in posing this poll. I am sorry you reached that conclusion, and apologies for any misunderstanding that lead you to assume that I did. With the exception of the gifted comment, none of the issues were directed specifically at you unless your name was used in the sentence. I knew from your first post that we both thought "the bbo is doing enough" on this issue, which means that we agree on this issue that the current situation is working fine.

 

What my last post was dealing with is my concern of the "implication" of the three strikes option in the poll you started. None of these implications are meant to suggest you support the views I have associated with the three strikes (in fact you are against the three strike option). In the US, the concept of three strikes and out of support in a lot of settings (three strikes for felons and they are in jail for live, for instance) and the theory "sounds good". But in fact I have problems with it ESPECIALLY in a situation where deciphering "intent" is associated with a disconnect has to be determined (by someone, if not TD's, then who)?

 

I acknowledge that the "gifted" quote was directed at you, but in no way was meant specifically to humiliate you, but rather to make a point. It was a response based upon your reply to my point about the difficult of determining intent. In the first case, from accidental disconnect (in my case caused by my wife). However, my first attempt to get this idea across failed, because despite my example your reply that a disconnect under the very conditions I specifically recited happened to me was surely 200% intentional. 200% for emphasis, that the situation I stated (and mishovnbg will be a good witness) will not only never happen in your mind (100% would mean it would never happen), but it really would never happen. Then in you next to last post, you call me out again with the statement about the vast majority of intentional disconnects being due to bad behavior, not "not with a wife that pickup a telephone". Now, who where you talking about with that statement? In both cases you were minimizing and ignoring my primary concerns without a clear statement of how anyone can determine intent when a phone line goes quiet.

 

Since you were so dismissive of my point of view, I used the word the “gifted” to convey the concept that you must have some special abilities at mind reading to be so sure about a person’s intent when they get disconnected from the internet in any one of the methods other than clicking the close window icon (I allow how if they close the window normally, it is intentional). So I posted a long reply, to point out other ways a player might become disconnected while playing without clicking the close windows icon, and that associating intent with any of disconnections. So while you view the vast majority as intentional, and they probably are, I still see no way to tell precisely which are and which are not intentional.

 

But as I pointed out above, I really objected to the poll question specifically on 3 strikes and out. I was also against a proposal in this very forum in the past to start a database of tournament jumpers and abusive players to be shared between tournament directors. I view the 3 strike scenario with two TD's getting together to count up to three disconnects for one player as a reincarnated short version of this “database” idea. You should be aware Marc, that I never suggested that you were gossiping or plotting against anyone, but instead was voicing a general concern that this would become an common if a 3 strikes policy was started. To be clear, let me say this again: contrary to your assumption, I never said that you personal had any secret gossip to bann players (this despite your statement in an earlier post that "i get a lot of tds that say me:always the same whit that"xxxx" player and well he’s listed in mine long time", which i see as a natural consequences of sharing directing duties, not gossiping). Furthermore, currently there is no point in such activity because no three strike policy is in effect.

 

Finally, I think you misunderstand my "defense" of people who get disconnect. Your questioning statement about why would I play in a tournament if my phone is getting picked up is misdirected. I have never, ever abandoned a tournament during play and to the best of my knowledge never even been disconnect during one. As an aside, I think people with bad connections should NOT play in any tournaments as it is a disservice to others. My views on the determination of “intent” is theoretical and abstract based. Since I see evidence that the current BBO discipline strategy is working well, I can’t even imagine the need for this poll. There is not a single tournament director who should have to put up with bad actors, you can act on your own to ban anyone from your tournaments. And it doesn’t have to be bad actors just at the table. For instance, if you believe my replies here have been too harsh you could easily ban me from all your future tournaments. Would it hurt my feelings and would I feel such an action unjustified? Sure I would. Would I think your banning me would be due to a “misunderstanding” because I never meant to have this discussion be personal? Absolutely. But as unjust as such a ban on me would be in my eyes, it would not significantly impair my ability to have fun and play bridge/kibitz on BBO while retaining your right to pick who can and can not play in your tournaments. And this is the way it should be, imho.

 

Ben

[spwdo]

hi,

 

 

well, im sorry, obvuiosly i jumped to conclusions and as fair as possible as i can be i feel the need to make my excuses here. the whole idea behind this poll was the to get an endresult where several votes went to the" td dont do enough in reporting this" so as a result maybe to move 1 or 2 td to actually start using the tools we already got, not only the i.d., but also for veruios rude behavuior .

 

 

a side story about the i.d

 

while playing in main bridge club, a player seated seconds make a silly bid , we dbl , dummy unfolds and player left and went to play upon another table, clear case of i.d aldough player never closed bbo window.

 

ben, i apoligies in every meaning of the word where i been wrong and hey never woud i sink as low to list someone who openly expresses his/her opnion or critisis my view /ideas on issues, i was under the conclusion that u thought i was having other motives then the ones i expressed and (suporting 3 strikes, wanting power to ban players), i coud have figured out that u wernt, 99% u were the first that saw the topic and also my vote lol. last but not least, i must say that aldough it happens in every tournament , its at least i think it is becoming more rarer every day in tourneys where there is a policy to report these things.this must get around to players while they talk to eachother too so i think the key is to get tds to know that this feauture/tool is working .

 

 

but bye all means less not forget we tds volunteer here to let people play and enjoy themselves .me personal find plaesure in hosting and i always get warm feelings after every compliment we get for our efforts.

 

 

 

greetings marc

[Frosty]

Ok - I'm tiptoe-ing into this HOT TOPIC, but cannot resist putting in my 10 cents ...... but my hands are in the air so DON'T SHOOT :D

 

If you run unclocked tournaments, many of the issues from clocked events are moot. Intentional disconnects are always a problem, but for the sake of arguement lets assume we are talking - from a TD's point of view - of clocked events where time is critical. (Sorry if I seem unconcerned about play in the Main Club, but casual play is intended NOT to be as structured so the annoyances may be greater).

 

It IS sometimes difficult for a TD to tell if a player has intentionally disconnected. When this is the case, I do take benign action (see explanation later in post), but I don't waste my time trying to figure it out if there is a plausible explanation for the players disappearance. Some are obviously intentional disconnects - i.e. the foul mouthed partner who berates partner/opponents constantly and finally leaves in a huff (often right after he bids 7NTxx on 3 HCP's), the pair who's scores are dismal who miraculously leave simultaneously, the player who whispers to me that he/she can't stand partner and is leaving ........ these are easy calls.

 

The obvious cases I handle this way: 1) I report them by BBO name along with the tournament name/#/date/time and a brief description of what occurred to abuse@bridgebase.com, and 2) I send them a BBO Chat-Mail message telling them that they have been reported to abuse@bbo, that they may experience some penalty for their action and why. If I can find the player on BBO, I also add notes to the profile and add the player to my enemy list. None of this gives instant relief, but its my firmly held opinion that the only thing that should be instant is me taking action to put in a sub. As soon as this is taken care of and the hand is back in play, I can usually take the steps above while the tournament is still in session or shortly there after.

 

My experience has been that the "abuse" report and my note to the player along with any "blacklisting" and/or profile notes is very effective. The support we TD's get from the BBO folks is more timely and more suppportive than any other I've seen at online bridge sites. I have always gotten an appropriate and prompt response from "abuse". I often get a reaction from the player.

 

The borderline cases are trickier. I handle these by sending a BBO Chat/Mail message to the player asking why he/she left and suggesting that it appeared as though their departure was not kosher. Sometimes the answer I get back confirms my suspicions/sometimes not, but it certainly serves to put the player on notice that unplanned departures from a tournament are a no-no and can result in some type of penalty if repeated. I also add notes to the profile if/when I can find this player (sometimes has to be done from my written notes at a later time). If the problem recurrs, I have the player's profile notes to refer to and don't have to remember if this was one of the "maybe" cases. Because, as Gerardo says, the Yellows can tell if someone disconnected on purpose - I "might" ask if a disconnect can be checked, but I try to make this the exception to the rule for two reasons: 1) I'm too busy to deal with speculation and 2) they're too busy to deal with "was it or wasn't it" cases, which could easily grow in number until they became unmanageable. Instead, I will save this option for if/when I REALLY need it.

 

As a TD who runs only clocked events (7 minutes per Board) - I am often typing as fast as possible - and I'm a fast typist :rolleyes:. I like to remove problems, deal with what I know for sure and focus my attention on the players who are there playing. Those who are "naughty" will soon learn they either can't or shouldn't enter my tournaments ........ over time, this will become less and less of a problem.

 

I appreciate the "heads up" given me by other TD's on problem cases and I keep a separate list of those reported to me, but I do not add these players as enemies unless/until they are a problem in a game that I am Directing. I think the combination of what BBO has provided for TD tools, the cooperation between TD's and the support provided by BBO Hosts/Staff is excellent. We are genuinely much more fortunate than Directors on other online bridge sites!

 

Frosty/Jan

[csdenmark]

What´s the job of a tournamant director?

 

To create and maintain a millieu guarding

 

- a fair trial

- a comfortable social attitude

 

Set-up of a tourney has something with that to do. Playing a 16 board trial you will notice with 7 min. per board:

 

- 10-15% will create a summed waiting time of approx. 35 minutes. Time to annoyance

- 15-20% will need up to 8 minutes to finish - they will in some way be punished. Reason for annoyance.

- If a tourney is hit by severe connection problems - up to 50% will need more than 7 minutes to finish. Stormy weather for a TD.

 

I think BBO is doing something good trying to handle disruption of the basic rules for decent behavior. No doubt. I would have liked Gerardo informing that scoring is in no way a part of deciding whether intensions may be a reason for disconnection.

 

We know it is possible to detect the nature of a connection and we also know it is possible to detect weakness of a connection. Thats the way to decide and I hope this is the way it is done. If so I wonder why it is not automatized and why it is not imposed for tables in main club too. It is exactly the same rules to be violated. Consequence is an important word dealing with rules and therefore I think this ought to have been on top of agenda for software modifications for very long.

 

Maybe you think tourney's are more important than other set-ups - fair enough. Please take into consideration those very many people just using tournaments for an alternative set-up of social play using TD's as servants for lazy people.

[Gerardo]

I didn't mention scoring because it is just irrelevant.

About automating consequences, agree. About main club, too. Table jumpers have to deal with consequences. Current mechanisms to deal with that were OK in old times, but didn't scale IMO.

Think BBO will switch to a more flexible mechanism sooner or later, but I have no idea when.

[Frosty]

Sure CS -

 

Would be nice if both determination of, and consequences for disconnects (intentional or otherwise) were automated - as an antique programmer/systems analyst I'm all for it. But in the mean time its a good idea not to get so involved in the administrivia of game management that we forget the reason many make use of an online bridge sight - social interaction with fellow bridge players.

 

Yup, CS, there is an entire block of players who use tournaments as a social structure rather than setting up the same in the Main Club! Count me as one of these folk and here's why we do it ....... Table hopping is chronic in the Main Club and its tough to get much continuity if you are new, unknown, or don't play there often. I know its hard to believe that they let us have access to online bridge sites, but for some of us bridge is purely social; (I even suspect that this is why the game was invented in the first place :) ). This is not to say that folk like me don't become improved players along the way - many do. It may not be politically correct of me to say so, but, in the bridge community in general, there is entirely too much condescension directed at casual/social bridge players. Its a good thing for players to use tournament settings to have a controlled series of Boards in competition with other players of varying ability. Some of us are not only pretty good bridge players, but are even people worth getting to know! I wouldn't call it lazy :) .

 

I'm aware of the stats for 7 minute rounds and that 8 minute rounds are possibly safer statistically .... however :) - I don't see that you've included the stats for people who sit and wait for a clocked round to be over because they don't need the extra time. The 1-3 "out-of-time" adjustments that are needed after the round are quite manageable - but the most important thing is that the MAJORITY of the players don't have to sit and wait for the MINORITY to get done. I find far more tables twiddling their thumbs, having finished a round with a good deal of time to spare. Because they are the larger group - I prefer to cater to them. Interestingly, after the first survivor cut - even with 100% of the boards scored, I find that the slower players often don't advance. I get very few "out-of-time" adjustment calls in later rounds.

 

I also get MANY requests to tweak the start/end time of my tournaments to allow for players coming from, or going to other tournaments on the schedule. I try to accomodate this where ever possible as a courtesy both to the players and to the other Directors. With shorter time constraints, there is more flexibility to move a game 5-10 minutes in either direction.

 

Last - lets not forget that time set by the Director for a round isn't written in granite - it can be changed. In the situation where chaos sets in, its very easy to adjust by just upping the time per Board, and setting it back when you're back on track. More players have to wait when this happens, but most understand when its a rash of unstable connections.

 

Frosty/Jan

[bearmum]

Well at least 2 times I had disconnect ( NOT deliberate I assure you) in tourneys - and ONE I KNOW SHOULD have been bad result - my computer FROZE :) and by the time I rebooted and reconnected to BBO it was FAR too late - I did send private message to TD :) - BUT really not sure if TD received it :)

 

SO if I get BLACK mark for TWO I acknowledge - what happens if it happens again (if 3 strikes u out - or i get on TD's black list ? :) )

[inquiry]

Interestingly, after the first survivor cut - even with 100% of the boards scored, I find that the slower players often don't advance. I get very few "out-of-time" adjustment calls in later rounds.

I think I can explain this observation. The majority of the very slowest players play slow due to the bad connections. The survivor movement has a very thoughtful feature you may not be aware of. The people who are cut are, say the lowest 15% (if that is what you set)...BUT... if one of a partnership is currently disconnected when the cut occurs (due to bad connection say), they will be include in the 15% REGARDLESS if they are in the lower group or not. This could have the unfortunate affect of cutting a leader if he or his partner happens to be disconnected when the round change occurs, but since the poeple who might be disconnected are generally the ones with bad connections to begin with, a few of them get "weeded out" at the end of each survivor round...

[csdenmark]

Jan - I have used a broad paint - please understand. I think we agree in most of your last statement - also about using tourney set-up for social play. Find a better word - I think I will be able to do so in danish language. So it need to be with all my statements in english - I try to express the basic meaning and if somebody want to read nuances - they will need to learn danish for that!

 

I'm aware of the stats for 7 minute rounds and that 8 minute rounds are possibly safer statistically .... however  - I don't see that you've included the stats for people who sit and wait for a clocked round to be over because they don't need the extra time.

Here they were: - 10-15% will create a summed waiting time of approx. 35 minutes. Time to annoyance - Try to run some unclocked tourney's then I am sure you will see these figures yourself. The quickest ones plays 4 1/2 - 5 minutes per board.

 

You will often face connection problems with many players living east of the present eastern border of EU. So it will be at least for 10-20 years more I think. Their broadband connection is mostly from work - home they use dial up. In european business hours connections are very vulnerable. Poverty will be the main reason for this not to change much for a very long period of time.

 

I don't care which set-up a TD prefer. Not of my business. But to create a clocked tourney using cuts(surviver) or individual - they are just creating an event heading for problems.

[Frosty]

Thanks CS -

 

I think you are too pessimistic .... clocked 7 minute survivor tournaments is all I run - 4 times a week, and its working for me :rolleyes: .

 

I wish I were as gifted as you - I only speak one language!

 

Frosty/Jan

[spwdo]

hi,

 

since the discussion is slpping in to a clocked/non clocked one, i ve a few things to add their too,first to ben, when someone p is disconnected they are indeed excused from the tournament, 99%of the players know this, the ones not aware are informed from us so they have chance to get a sub so they can proceed, we(not much work) check the red dots at end of round , go to the table and give players that choice, often players say, its ok , no sub, let me be excused, fair enough.again we all agree on this i think that when u have a very poor connections , why enter clocked tournaments? second , i dont agree with east-europe part of cs comment that dial-up is causing more problems then others, maybe for a small percentage thats true, i run 2/3 tournaments per day at least, countless time i have seen and saw turkish , polish players,taking in the whole poduim. A whole bunch is regulars players(i even searched a long time to get a vey good polish/english apeaking td to help us out, some polish player know only polish, and we dont want to exclude anyone for only languages prob) well i run a few unclocked events myself, we taking numbers here, 16boards , +- 200 pairs, well this coud easely take all day, i agree when u have a mangeble field but this is not, then the waiting aprt of the game, when u are fast in unclocked , u play against the fast over and over again, same for the slowplayers, not fun when u get a zillion mesages "why u give us same opps again" at least in survivor this is based upon scores, secondly, how many last boards% are played in an unclocked event? the number of skipped boards is way to much , u only need one slow player each round to never be abled to play a last board, i think in overall its fair to say, when u run a private tournament, with small numbers i agree unclocked is an nice set-up, however we running tournaments that are scheduled and we dont want to overlap someones tourney starting 100/mintes later when we are hosting 12 boards for example, loads of players messages us:

"can we play both, it is finished in time, dont add time plaese(we signed in for the next)" in unclocked with some numbers , calls are vastly:" td, when we move", "td, why wait so long," "td, why is clock minus,""td,why same opps three time", td, i cant stay that long,"td why board is skipped when opps play slow on purposse", i woudnt say these things if i didnt knew, i dont know how many tried it before hosting a 100 table unclocked/clocked event, if it where to any advantage for me or players in general i woud reconsider this in a sec, as for the lazyness involved, jan mentioned a very good point, when can u play in main bridgeclub 60/90/120 of bridge with getting your scores and results afterwards and meeting other players witch u woud never met or play against in main, countless nice comments we get when 2 novice had the "privilige""opertuntiny"(they message me that) to play against 2 stars . another thing what some forget is that we are volunteers and when we run a 12boards/8 minutes/baord tourney we know we are finished in max 100 minutes.

 

 

 

 

greetings marc

[csdenmark]

I dont think a thread need to de-rail and this thread is not about unclocked/clocked events. Said this in unclocked events all tables are played, for 12 boards the first ones will end after 60(12 x 5) minutes and the last ones after 96 minutes(12 x 8). With very hard disconnections the last ones will end after 120 minutes(12 x 10).

 

I think we agree of the basic characteristica:

 

- clocked = uni-size

- unclocked = tailor-made

 

I think we disagree about the values of each of above items.

 

I think we agree that choosing format is like shopping in a supermarket. Each have the right to choose whatever he thinks is best. Nobody asks for reasons for decisions.

 

-------------------------------------

 

For me I think it now will be time for a conclusion.

 

Marc you started this thread blaming people with poor scores for intentionally disconnections. By that you confused cause and effect of an action. I opposed because correct arguments are neccessary to reach correct conclusions.

 

---------------------------------------

 

We now know BBO server has the neccessary information for rightful imposing of penalty to violaters of basic rules for decent human human behavior. I am very impatient to see that implemented for automatic ruling. Such we all know will eliminate the problem in very short time.

 

I also hope it will pave the way for later better approach regarding disclosing information about systems and about basic personal information.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

Many kind of skills are required for a tournament director. A bridge playing site is not a computer game like 'Wargame' or so dealing with puppets. - You are dealing with human beings.

 

Skills like below are certainly needed:

 

- Bridgelaws

- Characteristica for several systems(4-card and 5-card major, pass-, club- and diamond- systems)

- Ability to understand/guess basic bridgeterms in several, maybe strange, languages

- Scoring

- Handling of software for substitutions and score corrections

 

The most important skill is not one the those mentioned above. The most needed kind of knowledge are about culture and psychology.