Had we but world enough, and time...

[hrothgar]

I'd like to raise what I consider to be an interesting question:

 

Do the tournament directors have firmly established guidelines regarding appropriate ratios between tournament directors and the number of tables. I've seen a number comments from tournament directors suggesting that they do not have sufficient time to deal the volume of director calls that they receive. For example, in a recent posting xx1943 indicated that he did not expect directing to be so difficult because he thought that he would have "had time enough like TD in real life"

 

This comment immediately raised some flags in my head. If tournament directors are running into problems servicing tables, then we need mechanisms to adjust the ratio between tables and directors. Associated with this, directors need to be given accurate guidance regarding how many tables that X directors should be able to direct.

 

This type of problem is very ammenable to formal analysis. It so happens that I have a pretty strong background in mathematical modelling and I've worked on a number of analogous problems. For example, I've developed some quite pretty queuing models that are used to match customer support hirings to call volumes.

 

I can hand over a nice little model, however, I'll need a few statistics to work with.

Most notably, I need some way of modelling likelyhood of a director calls as a function of the number of tables. I'll also need an estimation regarding the amount of time that it takes to close a call.

[uday]

I think 10 tables is a reasonable and conservative estimate for a new TD in a clocked event.

 

Gweny has run 80+ tables by her lonesone - don't try this at home.

 

If there is really value here, i can log the TD calls as they are made.

[inquiry]

40 tables is enough for any director (no idea how gweny manages 80)...

 

However, there are some people who run tournments with rules that state,

 

1) No director calls except to replace stuck player

2) No alerts of any kind

etc...

 

And these tourments, the "director" plays. Obviously, that can be close to unlimited in size (especially since player can sub their own partners, so only if both opponents gone do you REALLy need to call the director).

 

As a yellow, I hate these tourments, because guess who people complain too when their pleas of "we wuz robbed" go unaswsered by the "directors". So PLEASE, pretty please, read the condition of contest before you sign up for any tournment.

 

Ben

[csdenmark]

I have problems to read and understand you Richard. Normally I read you as all can do whatever they like - you choose from what you seems to be attractive and choose those events only.

 

You seems to be a little more keen whether some are applying to specific ACBL rules you arbitrarely have chosen to accept. No matter here whether the events in general will be attractive to you. Those ACBL rules which you oppose to I normally read you also the TDs ought to reject.

 

If I am right in my readings of you I think you ought to reconsider cosistency.

[hrothgar]

I have problems to read and understand you Richard. Normally I read you as all can do whatever they like - you choose from what you seems to be attractive and choose those events only.

 

You seems to be a little more keen whether some are applying to specific ACBL rules you arbitrarely have chosen to accept. No matter here whether the events in general will be attractive to you. Those ACBL rules which you oppose to I normally read you also the TDs ought to reject.

 

If I am right in my readings of you I think you ought to reconsider cosistency.

Claus, you are substantially misrepresenting my position.

 

I have always said that tournament directs should be able to run what ever type of tournament that they see fit. All that I ask is that

 

1. Tournament directors should post the set of regulations that they are using.

 

2. If a tournament director does not post a set of regulations, then the tournament should be run in accordance with the laws of Bridge.

 

3. That players have access to a public feedback mechanism by which they can evaluate the performance of different tournament directors and sponsors.

 

with this said and done, I have no idea why you are are introducing ACBL regulations into this thread.

 

My original post discussed whether or not there were guidlines regarding the number of tables that X directors should try to support. From my perspective, these GUIDLINES should evolve using statistical analysis of the BBO playing environment. How you twisted this into "ACBL regulations" is beyong comprehension.

 

In any case, I believe that it is possible to apply well understood analytic methods to this type of problem and produce a set of recommendations. Hypothetically, one such recommendation might be

 

In order to achieve an expected service level Q,

 

1 director should server no more than 12 tables

2 directors should serve no more than 26 tables

3 directors should serve no more than 41 tables

...

 

Here once again, this is an example of a guideline. Nothing more, nothing less. Directors have the option to do whatever they damn well please. If they want 1 director for every table, so be it. If they want one director for 100 tables, so be it.

[csdenmark]

Fine Richard - neither I think it is right to discuss here on WEB as if the Laws was something invented by ACBL or any other irrelevant body. I am very glad we agree on that - at least from now on. I am sorry to have misrepresented you. I hope you read my post as a query assuming I may have been unfair assuming disagreement. I am glad we instead can agree.

 

I have a question for you Richard.

If a tournament director does not post a set of regulations, then the tournament should be run in accordance with the laws of Bridge.

Which laws or who's laws?

[hrothgar]

>I have a question for you Richard.

 

>>If a tournament director does not post a set of regulations, then

>>the tournament should be run in accordance with the laws of Bridge.

 

>Which laws or who's laws?

 

Bridge has a very specific set of Laws which get revised every 10 years or so.

The Laws are posted on the Internet [google Bridge + Laws} and you can find them pretty quickly. If you prefer, you can go directly to

 

http://www.bridge.gr/departments/laws/laws.htm

[csdenmark]

Thank you Richard - I will study them carefully.

 

A first glance disclosed references to national authorities. No doubt this will need more close study as national authorities have no authority except to their members. I now assume we agree on that. Neither ACBL or Danish Bridge Federation have any authority here on internet on BBO except for events hosted by themselves. References to their authority will therefore disqualify such laws and meassuring time consumation for such activity will be without sense.

 

But I will study the provided laws more carefully now.

 

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

 

I like to compliment you Richard. The document you have found I think will be the nearest possible to a GOD-given document with self-constituting rules. In that respect it looks like we are now heading the same objectives. No matter of the content it is right to try a document by World Bridge Federation.

Edited May 26, 2004 by csdenmark

[blackbikin]

hi richard,

 

i have to say, that i think every td knows how many tables can handle single handed.it comes with practice and if new td screams for help we are always around to help out.

personally i m never in tourney alone, because i do not trust my spanish server to much.

i think bridge is a GAME and to many rules will spoil it.why are we talking all the time of just rules for everything, will we soon need a rule, when to breathe¿

i wonder what would you say to tourney which announces:"everything is permitted, if alerted and explained in english, except being rude."

come join one day, maybe you will see another side of bridge. i can even make you codirector...usually 2 of us handle 50 tables, but will not give more then 10 to you-on my scouts honour

love

barbara

[blackbikin]

sorry 50-80 tables per 2 td

[JRG]

Every game has a set of rules. The rules may be informal or formal. Sample rule: ♠s rank higher than ♥s.

 

Bridge is an intellectual game and it has a set of formal rules that have been agreed to. This allows competition, including world bridge championships. As Richard pointed out, the rules have been published and are available to anyone who wants to see them. In this sense, bridge is no different than chess or backgammon.

[Mirjam_3]

It is not only that one td is not the same as another td and even the same td is not always in same shape, it also has to do with the kind of players, the hands, the format of the tournament andsoon. :P

 

 

Diffferent directors:

I see directors who make a tournament wit 20 tables and ask for a co. And there are also Gweny and Frosty with big tournaments, running without any problem.

 

Once i had a tournament with a very complicated slam and i had difficulties to manage all calls in time...

 

Than there also tournaments i run by myself without any problem (proabably my regular Glamour since players and me know each other and the longer we work together the better these tournaments run).

 

Further i have good days and bad days. On good moments i can handle much more than on a day i am tired. I know td's who limit their tourneys too if they are tired.

 

 

 

 

Different players:

Some tourneys have more difficult players than other ones. I am studying on this one but it is true. Most easy tournament i was co in so far was with Frosty. When i told her later she stated she was strict and it is possible this might be the reason.

 

Tournaments with players who dont speak english, are harder for me than tournaments with players wit good communication. But this might be a personal thing of me! For me the most easy tournaments are in my own laguage. And these players dont disappear or if they do they return and i know they will.

 

Also on special, little tournaments i dont see people leaving, f.e. the ones from cappuccino. If you go to play her acoltourney you stay.

 

 

Different hands:

Some tourneys run easily and no problems at all. :( Yesterday i had a tournament wit two slams in one round, both on same site, and i was very happy i had two co-directors... since we got many calls about missing alerts... B)

 

 

Different formats:

An unclocked event is often much easier to run than an clocked event, unless you give time so every table can finish the round...

 

Clocked tournaments with limited time and ONE board every round are often most demanding. Lately i say no if another director asks me to co such an event... since i know it will exhaust me. :ph34r:

 

 

 

 

Other things you never know before u r in it:

Here every td can fill in his/her stories i think...

F.e. Blackbikin went on holidays and i took over her tourney for her during a week. It was a clocked event and one day i cdnot find a co and 240 players were there... I was inventive enough to make it unclocked and i survived but still.. how to deal with such a thing? Mostly free directors come in in last minute there to become co. Isnt a td allowed to set up the event before he/she has found co-directors? :blink:

 

 

Conclusion:

It seems a good thing to use statistics on this topic but there are various aspects which play a role here. It must be a challenge for people who love statistics though and in general i support the idea. :)

[Gweny]

:blink: tee hee actually it is 108 and yes it nearly kill me.

 

Here is main problem with modeling this environment.

Number of calls is not consistent since it is subject to many things.

 

like

 

State of internet on day in question

Number of "fussy" players (director he look at me funny)

Complexity of boards on day in question

State/speed of BBO on day in question

for this is directly relate to number of disconnects - if system is "sticky" then

many players get stuck causing delays AND increasing time per call

since TD must manually type in name vs select from list

Whether or not vugraph is running for this DEFINATELY effect connections

Number of people who is pushing button multiple time.

 

Frankly I do not think it is linear... (number of tds per table)

 

I do some approximation type thing where

 

1 td (me) do 50

2nd td do 40

3rd td do 25,...

4th td do 20....

 

since number of variables increase as number of people playing increase and if all go good (like day i do 108 alone) i am ok but in worse case and all things go astray at same time then it is possible for each tds to experience max volume at same time and see 5-10 calls PER TD base on short list given above.

 

For Fishys it is not AS bad as it is for non survivor tournaments for number of calls seem to increase over time AND time per call also increases.

 

ie if you see 5 calls in round 1, they normally subbing issues so it is matter of replace RED player.

 

As tour progresses we see less RED players and more RED DOT players which take more time since we need to type in name and pray first sub in list is at computer to accept/reject in timely fashion.

 

As tour progress we also see increase in number of calls due to bidding issues and also inevidible "they is playing slow" calls. Bidding issues take more time than red dot subbing since we must identify problem, listen to both sides, make ruling and then hope playing resumes - if one person is not happy with ruling it is maybe necessary to replace this person due to refusing to play.

 

At end of rounds, even with consciencious watching you maybe end up with adjustments. This require very slow time comsuming actions

click Table

Click show boards

type in name

click execute

click new window

click through play of cards

determine outcome

click table

type board #

type player name

type adjustment and pray you do not get call while doing this and pray you do not

spell name wrong

click adjust

 

Clearly adjustments is as time consuming as bidding issues. and this is hoping you time to do all this things without interuption.

 

Other problem is distribution of calls. At present (i think) each td get some number of TABLES. So it is possible TD1 is doing tables 1-20 and TD2 is doing tables 21-40 and all of problems is in tables in one or other section and since it is hard to keep track of other td without using msn messenger or some other im thing you maybe no idea problem exist for other section.

 

I think it maybe work better if calls cycle through available tds but i do not know if this is possible to code for.

 

I also think our jobs get much better if calls is limit to one per table. It is very annoying and inefficient when all people at table click to alert td to some problem. moreover it is not possible to see (without other click to check) if other td is already in table. <------wish list item)

 

And this is other issue - how cooperative is you players. If they is train to type in name of person who is problem (red dot) this DO greatly speed time at which we can replace non responsive players if it is busy. Going into tables is time consuming and keystroke expensive depending on whether or not board ends when you come to table (board result thing pop up and may result in losing typing but ALWAYS result in at least one extra click per time.

 

Bad clicks/calls is other issue - to bad it is not possible to uncall td. at present once player click call director then we must visit table to identify problem.

 

So... this is all player side issues.

 

Other very important issue is how long do it take td to handle one call? some tds is not very adapt and maybe 20 tables is large reach. other tds is ok for more so it is very difficult to model since you population is not uniform and you tds is not uniform and worse you tournaments is not uniform.

 

tee hee things may go "bad" in one heartbeat if bbo server lose port or one particular country suddenly experience connectivity issues.

 

But thanks for anything you come up with and let me know if i can help you with data.

[Mirjam_3]

Further u ask how much time a call costs. I advise u to make a poll on this one and i am curious to know the answer as well!

 

I have calls which take 10 seconds and i have calls which take 15 minutes each and sometimes even after the tourney. So far i never made notes about them, but u raised a very good question here.

 

I will try to notice how many calls i get and how much time they cost me, before i answer your poll. :blink:

[Frosty]

If I may add my 2 cents - one factor that has to be included is typing skill. I have no trouble running a tournament between 50-60 tables alone, but I am convinced that being a fast typist is my salvation.

 

Another factor that may not be measurable is Player Education. The length of time you have been running the same tourney name/format impacts the players' familiarity with your expectations and plays an important part. I am currently trying to teach ALL SKATE participants to private message for adjustments (since this eliminates some table visits) and to simply ask for an adjustment rather than giving me three paragraphs of the blow-by-blow which I am not going to read. Once we get over this hurdle, I believe I will have shaved some additional time off my ability to respond. I also find that teaching players to put the nick of the missing player in their call message can save time as well. If your players learn how to select their own subs for a disconnected partner, you can add another 5-10 tables to your tourney without breaking a sweat. I still believe that giving the TD a short block of time when the first round is seated and before the cards are displayed to give a few instructions to the players would be of TREMENDOUS value to the smooth running of every tournament.

 

Another factor is adjustments. Some don't do them at all which makes adding more tables per TD a snap. Some will adjust anything, which makes less tables a good idea. If the tourney is UNCLOCKED, adjustments aren't even a factor.

 

There are many ideas that will help any one TD be able to effectively and efficiently handle more tables alone - one of which is to have a collection of canned messages that can be entered into the chat with a few key strokes. "I am your Director, how can I help you" is good for calls when there is no explanation in the call message. Both Gweny and I cut our teeth on an online bridge site that gave us the option of having 10 such messages in our profiles that could be accessed with one combo keystroke (CTRL+ a number key) - so we know the advantage and have improvised by using a cut/paste file. STILL HOPE WE CAN HAVE THIS OPTION HERE SOMEDAY :-). Making your chat messages more noticable with special characters or caps is helpful too (although it is certainly maddening how rarely the players pay any attention to your messages). Having a set of Tournament Rules uploaded is helpful as well.

 

I'm not as scientific as some (Gweny), so I also think that the temperment of the TD figures to some extent - if you can take a lot of guff and respond quickly via the keyboard, you can run more tables. If you get flustered when people are unhappy/unruly or biting at your ankles, you need to run fewer tables.

 

Perhaps this can be measured - perhaps not. Either way there will alway be superstars like Gweny who will break the mold :-) LOL!

 

Frosty :P