Howell movement

[barmar]

(2) the Bridgemates are set to allow players to self correct a result without Director input/presence.

I don't think I've ever seen a bridgemate set that way, I didn't even realize it was an option.

[pran]

You are correct. We had a player at my local club mention this to me and how you could do it when opening leads are recorded and hand records are uploaded to the Bridgemates. You can do it only if (1) your opponents are not paying attention to the number of extra keystrokes and (2) the Bridgemates are set to allow players to self correct a result without Director input/presence.

 

Example: It is the first board of the round and I am North in a 7S contract and dummy comes down with the trump queen the only possible loser. I enter into the Bridgemate 7SN, opening lead SQ, making 7 and confirm as if I was East. If no error message occurs, then I know East has the spade queen. I then correct this board, deleting that result, and proceed to play 7S finessing East for the SQ for 13 tricks.

I am shocked. There is indeed such an option in Bridgemate but the default (fortunately) seems to be "no verification" (and "no upload of boards"). I cannot remember ever seeing this option activated.

 

Still, I think there should be a strong warning against activating this option.

[gordontd]

I don't think I've ever seen a bridgemate set that way, I didn't even realize it was an option.

I’m told some clubs with playing directors use it.

[BudH]

I am shocked. There is indeed such an option in Bridgemate but the default (fortunately) seems to be "no verification" (and "no upload of boards"). I cannot remember ever seeing this option activated.

 

Still, I think there should be a strong warning against activating this option.

 

I don't think it is that strange to enable this option. The only scores that can be changed by the players is for the boards they are playing that round. Once the last board result is entered and verified, if you click "OK" to get to the "next round screen", then the Director has to make the change.

 

We upload the hand records with the opening lead entry enabled because it has caused a significant drop in the number of score corrections after sessions. Often the wrong suit or declarer is entered and E/W don't check it carefully enough before hitting "Accept". Now there is a 75% chance an error message will appear saying the opening lead and declarer are inconsistent.

 

Add the suspicious contracts feature and the number of score corrections after the game has become almost nil.

 

If we ever thought any player was taking advantage as I described earlier, we would immediately remove the player correction in the current round feature.

[BudH]

One other comment about having the hand records uploaded so that the opening lead entry will be checked against it to look for wrong declarer entry.

 

If you think someone is guilty of "funny business", go check the Bridgemate log. It will be the "smoking gun" proving the player is cheating using the method I described earlier to find the location of a missing queen.

[Vampyr]

One other comment about having the hand records uploaded so that the opening lead entry will be checked against it to look for wrong declarer entry.

 

If you think someone is guilty of "funny business", go check the Bridgemate log. It will be the "smoking gun" proving the player is cheating using the method I described earlier to find the location of a missing queen.

 

Obviously something needs to be disabled; either the entering of the opening lead or the ability for the players to change the result. Similar for the Bridgepad.

 

I have sympathy for volunteer directors, especially in these clubs that seem to have frequent scoring errors and other irregularities. But I'm afraid there is no excuse for unsecure procedures.

[blackshoe]

Often the wrong suit or declarer is entered and E/W don't check it carefully enough…

Or at all.

[pran]

I think that incorrect entries are a real problem with Howell and Mitchell movements.

 

We (in Scandinavia) generally use barometer movements and immediately after each round has completed provide each individual pair with a report on that pair's results in the round.

 

Scoring errors are then discovered right away (while the plays are fresh in memories) and rectified within the following round.

[weejonnie]

Or at all.

Yep - there are a few At this event including hand 4 where one of the players was yours truly ;)

[BudH]

Obviously something needs to be disabled; either the entering of the opening lead or the ability for the players to change the result. Similar for the Bridgepad.

 

I have sympathy for volunteer directors, especially in these clubs that seem to have frequent scoring errors and other irregularities. But I'm afraid there is no excuse for unsecure procedures.

 

I would never have the player score correction enabled in a tournament setting.

 

But in a one or two section club setting, it is fine to use this feature.

[WellSpyder]

Often the wrong suit or declarer is entered and E/W don't check it carefully enough before hitting "Accept".

A classic example of not checking carefully enough came up yesterday. Board 1 NS 4H+1 score -450.

 

That looks OK at first glance. But actually it should of course be +450. Was the wrong declarer entered? Not at all. But the Bridgemates had been set up only to accept the actual number of tricks made, not the number relative to the contract. This became apparent on a subsequent board when the machine refused to accept "=" as the result. But on this first hand it simply ignored the "+" and accepted the number of tricks made as 1, ie 9 less than contracted for!

[sfi]

The other one that can catch you is 3NT vulnerable making 3, for 600. Hopefully the directors' scoring program can check for anomalies, such as -600 when everyone else is +600 in the same contract.

[StevenG]

I know a lot of good players hate having the percentages shown, but if you beat everyone else and get 0%, there's a fair chance the problem will be spotted.

[VixTD]

I now use the opening lead checking facility wherever possible, although that's not standard practice at the clubs I play at.

 

At the county league evening last week there were six head-to-head matches, scored by hand but also by computer as a backup and to display the results. Someone complained the next day that the two scores didn't match, and I eventually tracked it down to a board scored on the wrong side. I suspect that they had entered a lead card, found it wasn't accepted and just tried other similar spot cards until it was. I expect a lot of players do this.

 

Also last week I ran the last session of an eight-table "continuous pairs" tournament. Each session consists of three rounds of a full Howell, nine-board rounds, scored by cross-IMPs converted to VPs. We play the same hands in each round, so we use two sets of boards. On this occasion we arrived at the club to find the boards hadn't been prepared. The club captain found an old set that had been dealt for another event, but not used, and suggested I make up another copy. I did this, and checked boards 32 (not scheduled for play) against each other and against the hand records, to ensure they were the same set, and got play started.

 

Early on the first round I got several calls from one side of the room complaining that the lead would not be accepted. I quickly ascertained that the board sets were not identical (how that happened I don't know, perhaps someone had redealt boards 1-28 of the set and not documented it), so I quickly redealt one set and saved the day, with the help of the lead checker.

 

Sometimes this feature is really useful.

[barmar]

Sometimes this feature is really useful.

The question isn't whether the lead checker is a good feature, but whether it's OK for it to report the error before the end of the hand, when you're entering the result and the opponent is confirming it.

[VixTD]

The question isn't whether the lead checker is a good feature, but whether it's OK for it to report the error before the end of the hand, when you're entering the result and the opponent is confirming it.

Yes, but my point is that sometimes the usefulness is so great that it outweighs the disadvantages.

[Vampyr]

Yes, but my point is that sometimes the usefulness is so great that it outweighs the disadvantages.

I cannot imagine circumstances under which this would be the case. If the boards are somehow incorrect or whatever, you can wait until the first hand had been completed.

[BudH]

I cannot imagine circumstances under which this would be the case. If the boards are somehow incorrect or whatever, you can wait until the first hand had been completed.

If you really think this is a big concern, then disable the feature to allow the players (only in the current round) to change a result (contract, declarer, opening lead, result) after being entered and accepted by opponents. It isn't that big an inconvenience for the Director. In my case, I find most of the time the players are not correcting it themselves and are calling me over. The only difference for me correcting it is I don't need to enter the Director confirmation code.

 

I do think it is valuable to have all of the following enabled:

 

1. Opening lead entry

2. Hand record uploaded to the Bridgemates

3. Opening lead checked to be in declarer's LHO's hand

4. Suspicious contract detection feature (can be set for double dummy check within a chosen number of tricks and/or total tricks from NS and EW if the same denomination is declared in each direction within a chosen number of tricks)

[pran]

If you really think this is a big concern, then disable the feature to allow the players (only in the current round) to change a result (contract, declarer, opening lead, result) after being entered and accepted by opponents. It isn't that big an inconvenience for the Director. In my case, I find most of the time the players are not correcting it themselves and are calling me over. The only difference for me correcting it is I don't need to enter the Director confirmation code.

 

I do think it is valuable to have all of the following enabled:

 

1. Opening lead entry

2. Hand record uploaded to the Bridgemates

3. Opening lead checked to be in declarer's LHO's hand

4. Suspicious contract detection feature (can be set for double dummy check within a chosen number of tricks and/or total tricks from NS and EW if the same denomination is declared in each direction within a chosen number of tricks)

1: agree

2: disagree

3 and 4: agree, but not at the table - within the scoring program only

 

The players at the table should not receive any information during the round that the information they have entered is in any way special, questionable, advantageous or disadvantageous to either side.

[barmar]

There's a reason why these should be (and are) settable options. The security needs for a tournament are different from a club game.

[BudH]

1: agree

2: disagree

3 and 4: agree, but not at the table - within the scoring program only

 

The players at the table should not receive any information during the round that the information they have entered is in any way special, questionable, advantageous or disadvantageous to either side.

 

On #2, the hand record is in no way accessible to the players, especially if you do NOT allow the players to self-correct a contract/declarer/opening lead/result. It is used solely to check the opening lead is in declarer's LHO's hand.

 

On #3, the players only learn the input opening lead is not in the LHO's hand of the declarer input into the Bridgemate unit when E/W attempt to approve the contract/declarer/opening lead/result. A score correction cannot occur without the Director's knowledge if you are not allowing player corrections during the same round.

 

On #4, only the Director at his computer can see if one or more tables has input a suspicious result. While ensuring nobody can see his computer screen, he can check the result(s) flagged as possibly suspicious. If necessary, he can check the entered score is correct. Often, you know immediately the error and why it was flagged.

 

That being the case, it sounds like you would agree on all of them.

 

I can't stress enough STRONGLY encouraging North to enter ALL possible information (contract, declarer, and especially the opening lead) immediately after the opening lead.

[pran]

On #2, the hand record is in no way accessible to the players, especially if you do NOT allow the players to self-correct a contract/declarer/opening lead/result. It is used solely to check the opening lead is in declarer's LHO's hand.

 

On #3, the players only learn the input opening lead is not in the LHO's hand of the declarer input into the Bridgemate unit when E/W attempt to approve the contract/declarer/opening lead/result. A score correction cannot occur without the Director's knowledge if you are not allowing player corrections during the same round.

 

On #4, only the Director at his computer can see if one or more tables has input a suspicious result. While ensuring nobody can see his computer screen, he can check the result(s) flagged as possibly suspicious. If necessary, he can check the entered score is correct. Often, you know immediately the error and why it was flagged.

 

That being the case, it sounds like you would agree on all of them.

 

I can't stress enough STRONGLY encouraging North to enter ALL possible information (contract, declarer, and especially the opening lead) immediately after the opening lead.

Provided no information of a lead card error is revealed to the players at the table until after the final score at that table has been entered and confirmed (and cannot subsequently be changed by the players) yes, I agree.

 

I even stress North to enter the board number before any player removes his cards from that board. Ever seen the message: "You are not supposed to play this board in this round" (or similar)?

[blackshoe]

I see that occasionally. I know how to fix it. :-)

 

Note: our bridgemates tell us what the board number is supposed to be. In normal circumstances, no entry is necessary.

[pran]

I see that occasionally. I know how to fix it. :-)

 

Note: our bridgemates tell us what the board number is supposed to be. In normal circumstances, no entry is necessary.

Depending on settings in Bridgemate Control - true.

 

We play barometer movements with the same set of boards played during the same round at all tables.

(In the first round all tables typically play boards 1 thru 3 and so on.)

We often begin the round with different boards at different tables and must type in that board number.

The following boards in the round are then suggested (!) by the Bridgemate, but we can always override that suggestion.

[BudH]

Depending on settings in Bridgemate Control - true.

 

We play barometer movements with the same set of boards played during the same round at all tables.

(In the first round all tables typically play boards 1 thru 3 and so on.)

We often begin the round with different boards at different tables and must type in that board number.

The following boards in the round are then suggested (!) by the Bridgemate, but we can always override that suggestion.

 

One reason why, when two tables are sharing boards, you want the two Norths to be players who will pay attention and change to the correct board number when necessary. (The Bridgemate screen warns about playing boards out of order, as a precaution, which in this case is OK at one of the sharing tables.)