[spwdo]

hi,


i`m starting to notice that some players use the Avg- as a bonus , they try to get max scores and if and went set they let clock run out , a couple of 100 and a few 40 ,( we all can count) results in coming in above average and in survivor , they survive till last rounds , when we are called to those tables things go faster as long as we`re there,, and its hard to adjust , even give A+ to non offending pairs when they could have a far better score isnt far at all

greetings marc

[Giasone]

I task that just pain for who slows down purpose game in order to A = to the hand if called Td and for slow game once and sees slow game pairsC against pairsA pairsA is slow director asks if there are logon problems if it answers then gives a possibility to remain in torneo but I cannot damage pairsC and therefore in first possibility check 60% to pairsC but this he is worth only once if the problems continue I believe that I am right or to give the possibility to slow player of restart PC or it proceeds itself with changing in order to concur to regulate development of tourney. a hand second does not affect tourney and therefore me it does not have to be spoken endured about pain but to only change player obviously if from the TD it comes found slow brace with intentional slow game second me is good norm to exclude it from tourney and to signal it why rigiochi in mine tourney and this to me pain does not seem not one but only a way for having regular tornei most possible with regular developments of hand
Giasone

[mink]

Gweny, on Feb 2 2004, 03:11 PM, said:

... Consider chronic slow players.
(why they continue to enter time events of 7/8 min per board is total mystery to me) ...

I think some slow players do not realize that they are slow but think the others are slow, because their bids and cards are diplayed with a delay. The slow player himself clicks without delay when opp's bid/card is displayed for them.

Maybe a solution could be if the server ever records thinking time and connection speed, slow players should be given an indication of their own connection speed.

And maybe there should be an option for directors to specify the worst connection speed allowed for the tourney. The server will eliminate a slow pair when the current round ends, or automatically substitute the player in question.

Karl

[McBruce]

In order to properly apply the priciple of Zero Tolerance, the Director needs to have the option of applying a Disciplinary Penalty (Law 91A). Giving various average minuses will not work. I'm afraid I simply haven't had time in the last few months to direct, but if players are taking advantage of the timing rules, we need to be able to control this. Not only that, there is a sad tendency to making public statements insinuating or even outright alleging cheating, which we need to be able to immediately control. This was posted recently on rec.games.bridge (original post in red, my response in blue):

John Schuler wrote:

> 1N* 2C
> 2D 3D
> P
>
> *12-15
>
> I held (in on online tournament):
>
> x
> JTx
> Kxxxxx
> AKxx
>
> The opponents, upon seeing dummy, made comments like "I'm tired of this
> kind of crap", etc. I had NO idea what they were talking about at first,
> and eventually they called the director. They complained that 2C should
> be alerted if it didn't promise a 4 card major.
>
> To my utter astonishment, the director agreed! Alerting never occurred
> to me. At the time I ascribed this to an ignorant director and 2 more
> whining opponents* Is this really an alert?
>
> * A player who posts to this newgroup heard us bid 1H-1S-3H, alerted and
> explained as 14-15 hcp, 6+ hearts, and 0-2 spades, and wanted a
> suggested defense - chess?
>
>

I really couldn't care less whether this is alertable or not and my advice is that you shouldn't either. If one of your opponents has been damaged by your failure to disclose your methods -- and whether the rules say alertable or not, there is no reason you cannot indicate privately to the opponents that 2C doesn't promise a four-card major, since you must know that the majority expect it to -- you should accept whatever penalty the Director assigns. On this auction I see no great likelihood that there will be damage, but I guess it is possible.

However, if you allow such comments to be made at your table and do not report them to the Director when he arrives, you are doing us all a disservice. There is no reason for a player to make comments like the one you quoted, insinuating DELIBERATE action on your part, in any form of bridge, and if I am the Director and you quote the comment to me when I arrive that will be the first thing I deal with -- and now the question of whether or not your failure to alert/explain caused damage will be decided with you, not the opponent, getting the benefit of the doubt. I don't care what the Laws say, to me we are screwing bridge if we let people get away with gratutitous comments that are very thinly veiled cheating accusations.

If Mr. Grumpy was actually damaged, this is my ruling: "Yes, Mr. Grumpy, there is damage here. You forfeited the right to redress when you made the comment. PLAY ON. The Laws may take a different view, but in any case I get to decide the penalty and I'm going to whack you twice as hard with disciplinary penalties. So consider this a favourable ruling. Next time, assuming your aim is restoring equity, and not, as it seems to be here, intimidating the opponents, simply call the Director and keep your idiotic opinions to yourself. You are on report and any further such nonsense will get you expelled."

If Mr. Grumpy was not damaged, he gets the same speech AND a quarter-board penalty, escalating if he argues further.



If we cannot penalize Mr. Grumpy a quarter board for this comment, we have no way of controlling this. If players know they will be penalized in matchpoints for this, they may think twice before doing it.

[Trpltrbl]

I think you can solve a lot of the problems by running a tournament with more 3 or more brds a round. I seem to be able to run a tournament with 6 minutes a brd if I play 3 brds a round, compared with the 16 minutes for 2 brds a round. I have a lot less calls and the chronic slowplayers get put on my customlist, and I have not done that in a while, actually there are only 3 left as we speak.

Mike

[spwdo]

hi,


well mike , you a lucky guy, i used 3boards/1 round couple of times and to much baords are beeing skipped, we have agreed now with must directours in our tourneys to adjust first baord when 1 side is timeoffending, so the second baord is started in time(nomore skipped boards) we had 113 tables today and hadnt got one call of a baord beeing skipped(at leat to our knowledge) we check also every time we go to a table the complete movie and adjust all the av- we see in there, when a player ask for an adjust we check all baords he played(easy nowwith new software) and its a small % of players that always have problems with time. never had a complaint about adjusting first board for timeoffence, it beats a skipped board we feel, that leaves 4 unsattisfient player because all want to play, and its better to leave a table with second played and first adjusted then vice versa, some sort of spycholigie i dont know but the moment u adjusted first baord, second is dealt and all resume with counting and playing and it saves td work or at least its better devided(some adjust are done in the middle of round) and slowplayers are warned already and u remeber the tables, first thing i check after round is finisheh cause im wondering if they have finished

[Frosty]

To address Marta's original question - I do not adjust Boards skipped after the 4 minute mark. I DO tell the players in advance if they haven't begun the last hand in each round by the 4 minute mark that the Board will be skipped and they will earn the dreaded AVERAGE ..... AND, I tell them in advance that I will not adjust Boards that are skipped. Pairs who use delays (read cheating) as a tactic to win tourneys have only one objective: winning fairly or unfairly. Since I run Survivor tourneys, the prospect of being cut because of an unnecessary AVERAGE is often enough to inspire these pairs to drop their shenanigans. I know not everyone likes Survivor format, but it definitely has some built in preventative features

Frosty/Jan.