How Expensive?

[kenrexford]

In reading another post about CC editors and thinking through online bridge and such, and then thinking about technology advancements, I had a thought. I wonder how expensive it would be to design a method of upgrading CC's to a modern, high-tech approach, eliminating alerts (at least for major events).

 

In thinking this through, I thought about the most wild of ideas as a starting point, with undoubtedly a less exotic substitute perhaps being suggested.

 

The "dream game" would have a glass-top table with four screens mounted underneath but showing through the glass, perhaps with polarized glass, at each player. A personal display screen. A vugraph audience would have a split screen with all four screens visible.

 

Each pair would arrive at the table with a zip drive to plug into the table (N-S already loaded). This would download the system description into the table computer.

 

Each player would set his bidding box cards for his bid on a specific spot. At first I thought about a weight-based approach to determining what bid was made, but doubles and passes and redoubles mess that up. Probably chips in the cards, or a bar code scanner, or something like that. Anyway, each bid/call would be registered by the computer.

 

As each bid was registered, an explanation for that bid would pop up on the screen of the opponents automatically, along with a running bidding sequence. System shown.

 

In other words, the same thing you can get on line but catered to f2f.

 

Hmmm.

[matmat]

great idea.

 

i am sure nbo's would jump at the chance to use something like this right after they implement bridemates and dealmates.

 

 

the snag i see is that you would have the same sort of problem as there is with full disclosure on BBO. it's a huge time investment to update system files and also next to impossible to define every sequence, competitive or not.

[kenrexford]

True.

 

Maybe a less intensive approach might make sense, but with some depth.

 

For example, I think through the normal layout of conventional agreements in system notes sections. These are usually organized. So, imagine pages popping up as the bidding proceeded:

 

I open 1NT. The opponents see a page with a range: "(14)15-17" Then, the basic structure, as well. A laundry list of Responder's next call options.

 

Partner bids 2♦. A definition of that bid kicks out, with the system notes on one page.

 

From that point on, the opponents can ask.

 

Or, suppose a 1♠ opening. If Responder bids 2NT, the page on Jacoby Agreements pops up.

 

2♦ a strange opening? A split screen pops up, left half their structure; right half suggested defense. Outlines, whatever.

[Free]

Each pair would arrive at the table with a zip drive to plug into the table (N-S already loaded).

Zip drive??? In what age do you live? :P USB sticks are much easier.

[hotShot]

If you plan a high-tech approach there are few other interesting things.

 

1) Of cause the tables are networked, so that you "plug" your system in some server.

 

2) Your system descriptions is automatically updated. Whenever a bidding sequence is unavailable, the player has to enter it's meaning and the autoalert routine will use the description next time, the sequence comes up.

 

3) Each player has a complete partnership history on his "plug-in" device, so the TD can check if a psych is frequent or not.

 

4) Instead of putting up screens you can put the player from the same side of the screen in a different room.

 

5) The system can delay bidding or cardplay, if it's to fast and mark to slow moves in the log, so that the TD can check about timing issues.

[hrothgar]

Here's my immediate response:

 

Developing custom hardware/software solution is (almost) always going to be much more expensive than using COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) technology.

 

Almost everything that you are discussing can be accomplished by switching over to an electronic playing environment in which folks compete using networked computers.

 

Personally, I'd start by trying to figure out how much folks would pay for the ability to compete using traditional cards rather than computers...

[kenrexford]

Here's my immediate response:

 

Developing custom hardware/software solution is (almost) always going to be much more expensive than using COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) technology.

 

Almost everything that you are discussing can be accomplished by switching over to an electronic playing environment in which folks compete using networked computers.

 

Personally, I'd start by trying to figure out how much folks would pay for the ability to compete using traditional cards rather than computers...

You still need the f2f environment. Psychologicals and all.

[barmar]

2) Your system descriptions is automatically updated. Whenever a bidding sequence is unavailable, the player has to enter it's meaning and the autoalert routine will use the description next time, the sequence comes up.

This may work OK for uncontested auctions, but when you start including competitive auctions the combinations are going to explode. And don't forget that you have to consider vulnerability as part of the "sequence", so you can't necessarily use the description from an auction with different vulnerability (although perhaps it could offer it as a default and ask if the same description should be used this time).

[kenrexford]

The computer program could actually help with "hand types."

 

Actually, the more I think of this idea, the more intriguing. The more options for other analyses.

 

The table is on-line. When you sit down to play, your seat is recorded, as are your hands. The computer, then starts to record what hand you have when the auction goes blah-blah-blah. If the auction has never occurred before, then your opponent next time, if you have not defined it, will pop up this hand, or a both hands if it comes up twice, or so on. If it occurs three times without a definition, your internet service flags you to please define this recurring sequence. Something like that.

 

This database could provide interesting analysis tools. Tendencies. Score averages per sequences or bids. Etc. All automated.

[cjames]

This won't work for the reason Barmar stated, and I would that many really like to play like this?

[kenrexford]

Probably not. :(