cell phone policy

[hrothgar]

If I were running the ACBL, I'd strongly consider something like the following:

 

1. Identify the locations of the next "X" Nationals starting two years hence

2. Identify the local bridge clubs in those locations

3. Cut a deal with the local bridge clubs as such

 

Announce that the ACBL will need "Y" dealing machines on such and such a date

Tell local club owners that the ACBL will agree to lease their machines

Prepay the lease

 

The ACBL gets machines when it needs them without needing to worry about transport.

 

The local club owners can use the prepaided lease to subsidize their capital investment.

 

This type of system could actually be rolled out on a trial basis before implementing it on a national scale. Chose 2-3 districts as test cases. Work a similar deal in which:

 

The district contracts with the clubs owner for the necessary equipment to run regionals/sectionals and the like.

 

If the system works, roll this out on a borader scale, targetting locations where Nationals are scheduled. If the system doesn't work, you haven't lost that much money.

 

Personally, I think that the major problem is with the admistrative staff. Most of the TDs are too old and set in their way to cope with a new brand of bagels. I don't think any of them would ever be willing to consider shaking things up this much.

[blackshoe]

We certainly have TDs here who aren't interested in "new fangled" ways. We also have the other sort (me, for instance :) ).

 

The local bridge association (RABA) owns a duplimate machine and I don't know how many board sets. Last weekend there was a barometer session at our sectional. The TD (young guy from Ohio, didn't look old enough to be out on his own :D ) put a board set between each pair of tables. Each round, we shared boards (3 board rounds) between two tables. The TD swapped the boards between rounds. It seemed to go well. We had a dozen or so tables, maybe more.

 

I like Hrothgar's idea. Not sure anyone short of Eli Culbertson could sell it to the ACBL, though.

[jdonn]

You haven't replaced them over time as they break and wear.

In theory. replacement costs shouldn't be more than they are now, should they? If you have to replace a deck of cards after 1000 uses, that something like 75 sessions if the board is played 13 times each session. But, it is about 1000 sessions if it is only played once each session. So, while you need 13 times as many decks, they are used 1/13 as often.

 

This is not meant to suggest that the other costs you list don't make this prohibitively expensive in ACBL.

I think it's a false assumption that the depreciation of the cards comes purely from playing with them. But you have a point, maybe you'd have to replace them 1/5 as often or something like that.

 

Anyway I'm far from an expert in all this, but it's very easy to underestimate the costs of something like this. I'm also shocked to hear boards were kept at the tables at an NABC even in limited events. But I wasn't there so I certainly can't dispute that it happened.

[hrothgar]

Question for those you you in Europe, Oz, etc...

 

The first time that I ran into dealing machines, etc. was at the Icelandaire Open 10+ years ago. To me, one of the most surprising things was that the "boards" were all made of cloth rather than plastic / metal.

 

You had a cloth square with four little pockets that the cards fit into. The whole shebang folded up into something the size of a wallet.

 

Anyone else seen these?

 

In theory, you might even be able to dispense with board numbers.

 

You start by playing the Green wallet

You then play the Yellow wallet

You move to the Red wallet

 

Next round, you start by playing the White wallet

You then play the Grey wallet

You move to the Black wallet

 

The third round, you start by playing the checkered wallet

You then play the stipped wallet

You finish with the paisley wallet

 

The advantage of color coding is that this allows you to implement a just in time duplication system. At any given time,

 

One set of wallets is being dealt

A second set of boards is being played

A third set of boards is being distributed

 

This type of system (should) allow you to decrease the total physical inventories of wallets, cards etcs....

[TimG]

This type of system (should) allow you to decrease the total physical inventories of wallets, cards etcs....

Perhaps, but at the cost of requiring the boards to be properly duplicated in specific time periods. I would imagine that most duplicating should go on prior to the event. Just imagine the annoyance of a 15 minute delay in the Just In Time duplicating compared to the problem of a 15 minute delay in boards that were prepared hours ahead of time.

 

Besides, we all deal with playing boards in odd orders and/or playing the same number board multiple times during an ACBL Swiss event. I think it would be far harder to get used to the color coding than to get used to playing 1-16 followed by playing 1-16 again in a barometer pair event. Heck, the board could even be numbered 1-17, 2-18, 3-19, etc.

[skjaeran]

...and surely the ACBL can spring for enough cards and boards for the very top level national events.

Unfortunately, surely they can't (or at least surely they won't), and that's why it will not happen. I have been told by someone who knows that that is a fact.

 

There are other logistical problems as well. For example, after the round, instead of everyone passing the board down 1 table, the caddies/directors have to replace every board in the (very large) room.

I've never played in such an event, but isn't it the case that there is generally a complete set of boards at the table and north takes out the appropriate ones for the round to be played?

Yes, but I don't understand what you are getting at. If you use barometer in a 13 table section, then instead of needing 26 boards to complete the movement (2 on each of the 13 tables at a time) you need 169 (13 of each board). Further, instead of the boards being on the correct starting table and the players (easily) moving them for each round, someone has to collect all the boards every round and bring a whole new set for the next round.

 

Barometer is definitely better for the players and the game, but it's much more expensive and a huge logistical hassle.

 

Edit: Now I see what you meant, that at least there isn't an extra workload. I don't think that's the case, in my experience they won't give you boards at your table for rounds you aren't currently playing. Rightfully so imo. But someone else may know better, like Harold.

On our annual festival, we did give out all the boards for a session at the start. But we had too many instances of players taking the wrong boards that we abandoned this practice.

 

For the last few years we've had caddies changing boards each round.

[Phil]

In Orange County, I know of one dealing machine, and its currently in Colorado.

 

Barometer games are a serious headache to run. Its work to put together one set of pre-duplicated hands, much less # of tables x 26 / 27 / 28 boards.

 

Sharing boards for two tables just slows things down considerably.

 

If you want to improve security, hire several plain-clothes security that also monitor bathroom conversations.

[skjaeran]

This type of system (should) allow you to decrease the total physical inventories of wallets, cards etcs....

Perhaps, but at the cost of requiring the boards to be properly duplicated in specific time periods. I would imagine that most duplicating should go on prior to the event. Just imagine the annoyance of a 15 minute delay in the Just In Time duplicating compared to the problem of a 15 minute delay in boards that were prepared hours ahead of time.

 

Besides, we all deal with playing boards in odd orders and/or playing the same number board multiple times during an ACBL Swiss event. I think it would be far harder to get used to the color coding than to get used to playing 1-16 followed by playing 1-16 again in a barometer pair event. Heck, the board could even be numbered 1-17, 2-18, 3-19, etc.

At our annual festival I think we use something like 60,000 boards in total.

Half of these are preduplicated. After a session, the boards used go straight back to duplicating. We've got four duplimates running, and normally always duplicate boards two days ahead of when they're scheduled to be played.

 

All events are barometer tournaments. Bridgemates are used all over. We have big screens showing standings and a grid with all the tables - colour coded, so TDs always can look up and see which tables are slow/haven't entered all the scores etc.

[JLOL]

Norway > USA obv

[gnasher]

If it can be done, I think barometer scoring makes a more interesting event. The only time I've played in the Norwegian event that Skaeran describes, it seemed to go very smoothly, with the next set of boards always being ready at the start of a new round.

 

It's probably helped by the format: using a Swiss system means it's reasonable to routinely play three-board rounds. The Norwegians also seemed to have plenty of caddies, and enough space between the tables for them to distribute the boards quickly. Those factors, and the larger size of ACBL events, might make it problematic to do this routinely in ACBL events, but it ought to be possible in the finals of the major pairs events.

[xcurt]

If it can be done, I think barometer scoring makes a more interesting event. The only time I've played in the Norwegian event that Skaeran describes, it seemed to go very smoothly, with the next set of boards always being ready at the start of a new round.

I have no problem with a Barometer movement, but knowing your score means the last few boards are more important (since the pairs just off the lead will adopt high-variance strategies).

[barmar]

In Orange County, I know of one dealing machine, and its currently in Colorado.

I guess the Boston area must be progressive, almost every club has one now. Even the club I frequent (MIT/Draper Labs Bridge Club), with one 8-table game a week. The club director shelled out his own money, and the club is paying him back over time -- I think it will take us about 5 years.

[Mbodell]

In Orange County, I know of one dealing machine, and its currently in Colorado.

I guess the Boston area must be progressive, almost every club has one now. Even the club I frequent (MIT/Draper Labs Bridge Club), with one 8-table game a week. The club director shelled out his own money, and the club is paying him back over time -- I think it will take us about 5 years.

Yeah, the two local clubs I go to in district 21 both have dealing machines. I think we are in a transition point where 3 years ago dealing machines in the ACBL were rare and 3 years from now it will be rare for a club in the ACBL to not have one (or not have access to one). But maybe that is just in my local area.

[mtvesuvius]

District 9 has dealing machine for all Regional Pair games, but does not run any barometer games. All of my local clubs do not have dealing machines yet, however I think one club may be looking into it currently.