Please don't cut-off players who are almost finished.

[bluff10]

Playing Robot Tournaments, its very annoying when I get 'timed-out' with just 1 or 2 tricks left to go. Today I was playing #3735 and literally had clicked the CLAIM button on the last hand when it timed-out and gave me an average. So that meant I got zero for the entire session. I missed by less than 1 second. Surely the software should be able to detect activity - i.e. if cards are being played every few seconds - and estimate proximity to being finished, and thus be able to give a bit more time in situations that appear warranted. Maybe you could warn people with a buzzer and/or a notice that says "Session Ending Soon", or some such thing.

 

[ BTW the Robots occasionally get 'stuck' and take a long time, i.e. 20-40 seconds,...I never had this problem in past years; it may be due to band-width issues at my end, I don't know, but it makes it harder to finish 'on time'. Can your software track these 'robot delays' and add back time accordingly? ]

[Bbradley62]

If the posted rules state that you have 30 minutes to complete 8 boards, how much additional time do you think is reasonable to give players to finish if it appears that they are progressing? I'm sure some players would argue that they are moving right along when they hit the 30 minute time limit during the auction of Board 8.

 

I do agree that something like 30 and 15 second warnings would be a good addition, similar to the warnings in the Express Automated Fun games.

[barmar]

If the posted rules state that you have 30 minutes to complete 8 boards, how much additional time do you think is reasonable to give players to finish if it appears that they are progressing?

I thnk he's just asking for a few seconds, not minutes.

[bluff10]

I always thought 30 minutes was a 'guide' on how long it should take rather than a hard and fast 'rule'. When you are playing at the NABCs or Regionals or your local Club, they give everyone time to finish even if they go slightly over the 'time clock'.

 

BBO can 'see' where everyone stands, and if cards are being played cut a little slack, especially since the robots 'thinking' causes some of the delays. If nothing happens at any table for say 15 seconds then end it.

 

Finally if it is a 'rule' that you must finish in 30 minutes, then I think there should be a "TIIME CLOCK" on the screen showing 'time remaining' [this would be much better than a 15 or 30 second warning].

[barmar]

Finally if it is a 'rule' that you must finish in 30 minutes, then I think there should be a "TIIME CLOCK" on the screen showing 'time remaining' [this would be much better than a 15 or 30 second warning].

At the bottom left of the playing area is a box that says:

 

Score: ##% (or ## IMPs)

Rank: #

Clock: ##

 

It only has minute precision, so there's no warning in the last few seconds.

[bluff10]

At the bottom left of the playing area is a box that says:

 

Score: ##% (or ## IMPs)

Rank: #

Clock: ##

 

It only has minute precision, so there's no warning in the last few seconds.

 

I had never noticed that clock before. Is it something new?

I think it would be better if it had had minutes and seconds ticking, because that would draw attention to it visually.

Clock: ##.##

Calling it "TIME LEFT" might also be better. Making it bigger would also be better. Having it flash when the minutes change might also draw attention.

 

Thanks for bringing the clock to my attention. Its a big help even the way it is now (once you know its there).

 

p.s. The other 2 number are redundant as you already get that info from the scoring table. Why are they there? Remove them and make TIME LEFT bigger.

[bluff10]

I thnk he's just asking for a few seconds, not minutes.

 

To answer your question 'how much extra time do I think is needed', I think anyone who has started playing the last hand should be given time to finish provided they are playing cards at least every 15 seconds.

[Note: Why 15 seconds - because we are 'guided' at 30 minutes to play 8x13 = 104 tricks, which works out to 17.3 seconds per trick on average.]

[Bbradley62]

[Note: Why 15 seconds - because we are 'guided' at 30 minutes to play 8x13 = 104 tricks, which works out to 17.3 seconds per trick on average.]

I suspect that a significant part of the 30 minutes should be budgeted to auctions, leaving less for the play of 104 tricks.

[barmar]

I had never noticed that clock before. Is it something new?

No, it's been there for ages. In human tourneys it shows the time left in the round, rather than the whole tourney.

I think it would be better if it had had minutes and seconds ticking, because that would draw attention to it visually.

Maybe, but perhaps the constant updating would be distracting.

p.s. The other 2 number are redundant as you already get that info from the scoring table. Why are they there? Remove them and make TIME LEFT bigger.

You don't get the rank from the score table. And some people may prefer not to have the scores showing. In the web app you can show "Who's Online" instead, and in the mobile app you have to choose between showing scores and showing chat.

[bluff10]

No, it's been there for ages. In human tourneys it shows the time left in the round, rather than the whole tourney.

 

Maybe, but perhaps the constant updating would be distracting.

 

You don't get the rank from the score table. And some people may prefer not to have the scores showing. In the web app you can show "Who's Online" instead, and in the mobile app you have to choose between showing scores and showing chat.

 

All good points, although don't agree with the distracting point....its so small to begin with, plus I want players to be aware of it constantly as they play. Flashing it a few times each minute when it changes might accomplish what I want.

 

Here's another suggestion. Since I was not aware of the 'clock', or of any exacting time constraints, possibly many others aren't either. You have a standard warning message that tells players they are to play the hand when robot partner is declarer. You could add to that warning that "you have xx minutes to complete the tournament, see the 'Clock" at bottom left".

 

Finally I still hope you will give a grace period for players who have finished bidding are playing the last hand, so long as cards are moving say every 10 seconds. This is not a Speed-Ball contest.

[bluff10]

I suspect that a significant part of the 30 minutes should be budgeted to auctions, leaving less for the play of 104 tricks.

 

You are correct, my oversight. So lets says 90 second/hand for the auction. That leaves 18 minutes x 60 = 1080 seconds = 10.4 seconds per trick.

[bluff10]

All good points, although don't agree with the distracting point....its so small to begin with, plus I want players to be aware of it constantly as they play. Flashing it a few times each minute when it changes might accomplish what I want.

 

Here's another suggestion. Since I was not aware of the 'clock', or of any exacting time constraints, possibly many others aren't either. You have a standard warning message that tells players they are to play the hand when robot partner is declarer. You could add to that warning that "you have xx minutes to complete the tournament, see the 'Clock" at bottom left".

 

Finally I still hope you will give a grace period for players who have finished bidding are playing the last hand, so long as cards are moving say every 10 seconds. This is not a Speed-Ball contest.

One final suggestion that would be easier for BBO to program. If at the end of the allotted time one or more players are still playing the last hand, then automatically extend the time until all are finished, or (pick a number)for say 60 seconds maximum, whichever comes first.

[barmar]

I wonder if the people running into the time limit are not aware that you can claim when you're declaring and you're on lead. I probably claim by trick 8 or 9 on at least 50% of hands.

 

The only times I ever even come close to the time limit is if I get interrupted for 10 minutes.

[bluff10]

I wonder if the people running into the time limit are not aware that you can claim when you're declaring and you're on lead. I probably claim by trick 8 or 9 on at least 50% of hands.

 

The only times I ever even come close to the time limit is if I get interrupted for 10 minutes.

 

Good point. I wonder if the 'Claim' button should be mentioned in addition to the 'Clock" in the stock write-up about playing the hand when you are dummy.

 

Remember though I sometime run out of time when the Robots are taking too much time 'thinking'. Another player told me she noticed recently long pauses caused by the Robots, so its not just my system or internet band width.

[barmar]

Good point. I wonder if the 'Claim' button should be mentioned in addition to the 'Clock" in the stock write-up about playing the hand when you are dummy.

 

Remember though I sometime run out of time when the Robots are taking too much time 'thinking'. Another player told me she noticed recently long pauses caused by the Robots, so its not just my system or internet band width.

I've never noticed the robots taking more than a couple of seconds to think.

 

But once in a while the robots do get stuck. This is a known problem that we've not been able to fix. But I play about a half dozen robot tourneys a day, and I hardly ever see this (the only problem I have is that I play often from unstable public WiFi hotspots, and the mobile app isn't good at dealing with temporary network slowness, so I have to restart the app when it gets stuck).

[Phil]

Play in the NABC Fast Pairs sometime and you will be more aware of the time. Otherwise not much to add.

 

A nice feature would be a countdown showing seconds when the clock gets under two or one minutes. This could be useful when ACBL tourneys start too.

 

Very opposed to a 'grace period'. Bridge is a timed event.

[bluff10]

Play in the NABC Fast Pairs sometime and you will be more aware of the time. Otherwise not much to add.

 

A nice feature would be a countdown showing seconds when the clock gets under two or one minutes. This could be useful when ACBL tourneys start too.

 

Very opposed to a 'grace period'. Bridge is a timed event.

 

Agree with your countdown suggestion in final 2minutes. That would help (especially if they can make the Clock more prominent as well).

 

Regarding your other comments, I won't play in ACBL Fast Pairs, Speed-Ball, or the BBO Robot Races. Its not good bridge, its something else (gambling, guessing, luck, chuckles).

In any tournament or team game I play in at all levels it is common practice to give everyone time to finish any board that's been started. If you are late repeatedly they might take away 1 board and give you an 'average', or at the club level they sometimes give a "Late Play". Either way you don't get disqualified and a zero result for the entire session.

 

The older you get the slower your brain....lets have a civilized, friendly game and give a modest grace period. The BBO software knows when everyone is finished because they sometimes stop the Clock and post results well ahead of the Clock time running out. So obviously they can 'see' if people are playing, and it should be easy to determine if anyone is playing the last hand. If nobody is yet playing the last hand, then end it immediately.

[Phil]

I know clubs that average too, but there you've an orchestrated movement and a late pair has a cascading effect on the rest of the section.

 

Averaging isn't a good idea for robodoops. If I'm rolling an 80% with three boards I can just stand pat with averages and still win.

 

Bluff, the answer to your dilemma is an Instant Tournament. You get the outcome of a robodoop, but there's no time pressure.

[barmar]

A big difference between robot bridge and human bridge is that there's only one human at the table, which should speed things up significantly. In a f2f tournament, you need to allow time for the players to sort their hands, all of them to think about their bids and plays, agree on the result, and there will also often be some post mortem discussion. In robot games, none of that happens except for one player thinking (although instead of a post mortem discussion, I'll sometimes look at the results at the other tables). f2f tournaments generally allow 7 minutes per board; with all those time savings, 5 minutes/board seems like it should be more than enough even for a slow player.

 

And the 8-board non-ACBL robot duplicates allow more than 7 minutes/board -- practically glacial for online bridge.

[Bbradley62]

And the 8-board non-ACBL robot duplicates allow more than 7 minutes/board -- practically glacial for online bridge.

It appears to me, and clearly to OP, that 8-board robot dupes get 30 minutes (3.75 minutes per board), not 60 minutes (7.5 per). What are we missing?

[scarletv]

A countdown clock with seconds especially one where the colour changes when a player is behind the time might help players to identify a time problem before there is nothing left to adapt. That might be a nice improvement for the future.

 

It is great to have different areas at BBO where you can play slow or fast. Players should respect there are different ways to play Bridge as they themselves prefer to. Someone signing up speedball has to play fast, someone signing up a tourney with 7 minutes per board should not complain when he has to wait at the end of the round. Each one has to find the adequate place to play. Players are sometimes extraordinary rude to enforce what they think is convenient.

 

Who never played on a slow device or with bad internet or a husband in background needing care or any other handicap making you slow at typing and clicking will not understand what might slow down players.

[bluff10]

A big difference between robot bridge and human bridge is that there's only one human at the table, which should speed things up significantly. In a f2f tournament, you need to allow time for the players to sort their hands, all of them to think about their bids and plays, agree on the result, and there will also often be some post mortem discussion. In robot games, none of that happens except for one player thinking (although instead of a post mortem discussion, I'll sometimes look at the results at the other tables). f2f tournaments generally allow 7 minutes per board; with all those time savings, 5 minutes/board seems like it should be more than enough even for a slow player.

 

And the 8-board non-ACBL robot duplicates allow more than 7 minutes/board -- practically glacial for online bridge.

 

I'm playing Board #9518 right now, there are still 5 minutes on the Clock and only one player remaining ('lenk'), and he/she is still on Board #1. It seems silly for everyone else to have to wait 5 minutes for someone who has no intention or ability to complete the 8 Boards. Can anything be done about that, or maybe my assumptions that BBO can 'see' what is going on is incorrect?

 

On the subject of 'averaging', I was NOT advocating for 'averaging' and know it doesn't work on BBO for the reason mentioned above. I was using it to point out that bridge players generally are civilized people, at least those who don't like like playing 'speed' games are civilized (lol), and we should be willing to give a modest grace period to anyone who is already playing the last Board in a set. Heck if we can wait 5 minutes for 'lenz' , then we should be willing to wait 1 minutes for someone who is trying their best to finish. When the Clock strikes zero, just have it flash/pulse 'zero' for 60 seconds (like a count-down warning), or until everyone is finished, whichever occurs first.

 

Finally you seem to be dismissing the fact there are sometimes delays caused by Robots. You have not commented on whether the software can track these 'delays' and add back time accordingly if its necessary.

 

p.s. I calculate 30 minutes divided by 8 boards as 3.75 minutes/board, where am i going wrong. Most of the time 3.75 minutes/board is more than sufficient, glacial or not. However, occasionally it would be civilized to have few more seconds as I said in my very first post. [ACBL allows 7 minutes/board to allow for the differences you mentioned.]

[barmar]

It appears to me, and clearly to OP, that 8-board robot dupes get 30 minutes (3.75 minutes per board), not 60 minutes (7.5 per). What are we missing?

Nothing. I clicked on the wrong tourney when I was checking the lengths.

[barmar]

I'm playing Board #9518 right now, there are still 5 minutes on the Clock and only one player remaining ('lenk'), and he/she is still on Board #1. It seems silly for everyone else to have to wait 5 minutes for someone who has no intention or ability to complete the 8 Boards. Can anything be done about that, or maybe my assumptions that BBO can 'see' what is going on is incorrect?

We used to have it programmed so that the tourney would end if none of the remaining players did anything for a minute or two (I don't remember the actual length), so that someone who starts a tourney and then wanders off like this wouldn't keep everyone waiting. There were complaints, because sometimes people would get interrupted for 5-10 minutes. Their argument was that the people who are impatient for their results should just chill.

 

So we removed that. Now it only ends the tourney if all the remaining players are disconnected.

Finally you seem to be dismissing the fact there are sometimes delays caused by Robots. You have not commented on whether the software can track these 'delays' and add back time accordingly if its necessary.

I said that the delays caused by the robots are never more than a second or two, and those are infrequent. I can't recall any hands where there were more than 2 slow bids, and maybe there will be at most 5 slow plays. So if the robots delay 10 seconds per board, that's only 2 minutes in a 12-board tourney.

 

It generally takes me about 25 minutes to play an ACBL robot duplicate. Am I just a real speed demon, who can't appreciate that some people really need the full hour?

[Bbradley62]

Here is a thread that began a few years ago. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/55409-robot-duplicates-time-increased/page__p__771918__hl__%2Btime+%2Blimit__fromsearch__1#entry771918

 

Originally, Robot North played hands when he was declarer, rather than having Human South play them. When this change was made, the time limit was raised from 25 to 30. (And as I allude to in that thread, there originally was no "Claim" button.)

 

It would be interesting to see current data on how many players run out of time on 8-board, 30 minute Robot Dupes. I suspect it's very few. It might be hard to separate those who were actually playing from those who left the same without withdrawing, as OP describes above.

 

However, I do agree with Phil's suggestion that OP should try Instant Tournaments to be relieved of time pressure.