[uday]

Now that 3.5.1 is out of the way, we'd like to focus mostly on tournaments and private clubs for the next version.

Already planned (unless they turn out to be too much work ;> )

1) Do something about unclocked movements and playbacks.

I know there is an issue with playbacks in unclocked movements in pair games.
I know there is an issue with delayed-claims in clocked movements.

I dont know how we'll deal w/this but we will try.


2) Allow tourney host to restrict entry into tournaments with lists of names on his/her PC, as well as by selecting and combining from a list of filters from the server (example, "Include people who speak Icelandic", "Exclude people who speak Esperanto" ).

This will give tourney hosts the ability to maintain lists on their PC, and not have to fuss with private clubs solely for the purpose of restricting entry to tourneys. Allowing hosts to select multiple filters from the server allows us (by adding filters) to increase the specificity of tourneys without needing another client update

3) Allow tourney hosts to register/unregister players from his own tourney

4) Allow TDs to simply and quickly access board history or player history. Make the adjustment process more intuitive.


Things to consider: (not sure we can do this but we might like to try)

a) allow server to find substitutes without the TD needing to get involved except to say "Get me a sub for xx".

Maybe allow server to manage subs completely (ie, let server decide when to replace a stuck or missing player)


What else? I welcome suggestions for anything to do with tourneys and private clubs.
I know some of us have long-standing wishes. But i'm going to pick and choose from the list we generate based on (among other things) how much work it will be to implement these suggestions and how much value i think it will provide. Don't be offended if I dont choose to implement one of your ideas in the first pass.

[csdenmark]

Quote

a) allow server to find substitutes without the TD needing to get involved except to say "Get me a sub for xx".

Maybe allow server to manage subs completely (ie, let server decide when to replace a stuck or missing player)

Very good idea Uday! If A, please let server suggest the name of a red ID

Quote

What else? I welcome suggestions for anything to do with tourneys and private clubs.

We have had some private correspondance regarding invitional tourneys. I will be ready to find other ways than I have already used for describing the aim and the proposal. I think there are more than one possible solution and I think it will be a pity solely to focus on how to exclude people. I would prefer thinking the other way around - how to meet other people.

As I have understood, the private clubs are a tool for improving skills of people sharing something special to prepare for testing the outcome in competition with others from other clubs or just guests.

[Gerardo]

What about allowing TDs to set a result on playing hands?
That would allow an unclocked tourney with a "CHANGE!" at some point, decided by TD, not by clock.
This would solve some issues (in particular the ones you mentioned), an create others ("Director! Change pls!" "When will you do the change" "They were slow, give more time", "I was disc, not my fault", etc, ad infinitum ;D )

Procedural penalties, please! Especially for (usual) lack of alerting, missed/incomplete explanations, etc.

Unbalanced scores too (they should be not too dificult, I think), and weighted would be nice (but they are tricky).

[mink]

Hi Uday,

I have said this before, but just to be sure it is not forgotten: I would rather automatically remove a pair where one or 2 players suffer from bad connections, than trying to automate the subbing. Of course movemts must be able to deal with a decreasing number of pairs, but it should be possible that there is at most one sitout pair and no replays.

Subbing assumes that there are players available who are willing to sub. No automatism can help a tourney director when the sub list is empty and nobody answering the directors call for subs. And I would think that most players would rather quit the tourney than finish it with a complete stranger and no system discussed. I also wonder how subbing can succeed with restricted tourneys, as the players who fit the restriction criteria may not be available at all.

Your points 1-4 are fine.

Another suggestion: it is easier to find 4 players for a team match than to find 8. So it should be possible to enter a team in a "team desk" list like the "partnership desk" in normal tourneys and then find another team in the list which is willing to play against us.

Another solution might be that creating a team match does not require any names to be typed in. Instead, after all other items are filled in, two tables appear where players can join the normal way by clicking on the green seats. As soon as there are 8 players and the host clicks on the start button, the EW pairs of the two tables are switched and the match starts.

Karl

[csdenmark]

I have understood you in that way Uday that you asks for suggestions for software modification for how to handle tournaments for private clubs. I have therefore also assumed you were not asking for ideas for handling tournaments or private clubs individually but only the relation between those 2.

If you are asking for ideas to handle those not related to each other - I think the biggest problems are in handling the private clubs in the way they are intended to be used. That means administrative procedures and features for teaching mode tables.

[uday]

I want suggestions for tourneys and private clubs individually. Or together.

In my view the private clubs are being misused somewhat; creating a private club solely for the purpose of restricting entry to tourneys, for instance, is a waste. We're addressing this particular issue by allowing the tourney host to maintain his own list of users on his own PC, and passing that list to the server during the creation of a tourney.

What else is a private club good for? Do they need to be able to run tourneys "inside" the private club, so that they are invisible to all others? What are the limitations and annoyances with administering private clubs?

Some thoughts I have here are:

- Allow for more information to be listed about a private club, including a club URL

- Specify contact information for administration.

- Supply mechanisms to send messages to all club members online , offline or both (ie, send now if online, else send offline). Allow this to be invoked by club managers as well as (option of manager) club members

- Allow for multiple managers of a private club

- Allow teaching tables to upload more than one hand at a time

- Allow public clubs to bar members from the public club


More radical thoughts are

- allow managers to charge their members for entry to private clubs
- allow hosts to charge their players for entry to their tourneys
- offer "home" pages for private and public clubs on a bbo webserver, complete with forums, mailing lists, etc (maybe not for free, if we have to pay per club)



But what else is needed in teaching tables? I dont use them myself, so i'm not too familar with them (of course, FG is comfy w/them, to say the least)

[uday]

Mink,

you said

"..movements must be able to deal with a decreasing number of pairs.."

Do we think this is possible, assuming we are willing to have one sitout pair?

[hrothgar]

Quick comment here:

Philosophically, I do not have any objection to private clubs using BBO infrastructure to provide fee based services. I see this as a simple and logical extension to the well established practice of pro's charging individuals for private lessons. Pros are able to generate money by leveraging their skills as teachers/players. I see nothing wrong with especially talented administrators being able to capitalize on their own skill set.

With this said and done, I can think of a wide variety of improvements that I would prioritize ahead of integrating a billing system within the BBO application. Right now, pros are able to use the existing BBO infrastructure, however, they assume responsibility to provide their own billing mechanisms. I do not think it unreasonable that individuals who wish to run fee based tournaments do the same.

In a similar vein, I don't see any real need to BBO to provide a mechanism for club managers to build web pages. You certainly COULD go and do this, however, I don't see any real benefit to bundling this functionality within the existing application. There are other companies who specialize in this type of service. Take advantage of this.

I do like a number of your suggestions:

Allowing URLs for clubs would be very useful (I would think that this should be relatively simple)
Multiple managers would also be plus, as would a messaging system.

I like the idea that teaching tables can upload multiple hands, however, this doesn't seem specific to private clubs. Please note: If you are planning to make changes to uploading and downloading information, I'd very much appreciate being able to have a standard I/O format that could be used to input hands into the Partnership Bidding Rooms. While I like the Constrained Hand Generator that BBO provides, I don't think that it is nearly as powerful as a dedicated Dealing program like "Dealer" or "Borel". I'd love to be able to upload sets of hands that I generate using Dealer into the Partnership Bidding Room.

Thanks for taking the time to solicit feedback.

[csdenmark]

Hi Uday - I hope I have understoood you correct this time. Here my proposals.

Regarding private clubs

• ability to switch table between teaching mode and normal play mode
  
• ability to load a convention card to a table in teaching mode
  
• a direct button to partnership bidding tables
  
• an option to put partnership bidding tables in teaching mode
  
• ability to play a loaded card file in full length
  
• option to display online club members in lobby similar to friends
  
• option to send messages for all online club members outside club area
  
• ability to create simple sign up lists(for polls, tournaments, interests, partnerships etc.)
  
• ability to display some club info before persons apply for membership
  
• a hands on manual for handling of lin-files

Regarding the connection: Private clubs and tournaments

• ability to create invitional tourney's securing all guests(individuals or members of another club or different parts of a club(fx.Exotic club: Polish vs. Precision) to meet pairs from the club. I assume the most simple way for that will be to create the number of team matches from sign up lists of 2 connected pair tourney's. As far as there are enough sign ups for both lists the number of team matches to be created. Rest of the field will then play a small pair tourney
  
• enable a pair tournament creator to have 2 connected and pending tourney's(events) at the same time

Regarding tournaments

• restrict submitting empty convention cards
  
• ability to make convention cards mandatory
  
• let server propose substitutions and for TD to accept or correct or cancel
  
• ability to load additional description for a tourney(conditions of contest)
  
• ability to switch pairs in team tourney's after 1/2 of the deals
  
• a prompt to all players in a team tournament that it is created and ready to start in ??minutes
  
• ability to display victory points in tournament result
  
• ability to sign up for partnership desk using ID with more than 8 characters

[inquiry]

Multiple hands loaded at teaching tables should be a top priority. Also it might be nice to be able to have more than one page of "learning text" at the end of lesson hands. If the bidding is long, the text area can be short. Also, the click for next hand makes the text disappear quickly, might be nice if it would stay up until the table manager post the next hand.

I am not sure if having webpage host on your server is necessary, but a small area where the club managers could describe the purpose of their club would be. In otherwords, a small area with a few paragraphs describing the club, and contact information. Once you are a club member you can always read the club news.

I think clubs that charge is fine. After al, no one has to join. I suspect there will be some successful clubs that charge and others who don't charge that will be too.

Allowing Tournments within clubs is nice idea, but of course it will greatly limit the number of kibitizers. Lecture rooms in clubs might be good too, it is a shame the big lecture room isn't used more. Or maybe the public lecture room could be used more often by various mentors.

Now while charging for membership seems ok, charging for tournments raises the bar a bit. I assume if there is a registration fee (and others are free) then you must have some "reward" for the tounment (cash? points? fame?) which raises possible issues related to accusations of cheating, hard feeling, etc. on the otherhand I think these very features are what many players would enjoy having.

Ben

[inquiry]

An easier way to find the result of a player on a board. If a north player ask for adjusmetn, you can go to his table and view all result. If an East player ask it sometimes hard to find the hand in question.

Also, movements should be scrambled in tournments.

[Rain]

Teaching table :

I think the improvements in teaching tables could be for all bbo users, unless you're thinking of charging for certain premium services...

A type of premium service could be the prepared lesson deals. Right now there are 3 prepared lesson deals only, (actually there seem to be a bug there , can't play any of the prepared lesson deals..) I'll like more default teaching lessons there. (These are not teaching tables, these are the bbo default prepared lesson deals.)

Not quite sure what you mean by upload more than 1 deal at a time. Teacher just have to do up the deals, type in cards, etc, and save them prior to lesson. What I understood was you meant it could be more efficient to "line" up 8 deals at a time, and just have to click "next deal", "next deal"? If this requires a lot more coding, my opinion is that it is not a priority. Opening up folder and choosing the file name is easy enough...

I have always felt the teaching tables are super cool. My wish list (I know it could be difficult to implement, but it would be soo cool!) would be to tie teaching/bidding tables in with automated teachers/tools/software. It'll work like this :

Bidding portion
I'll open a teaching/bidding table, and specify that I want to learn Precision bidding. I'll get prompts whenever its my turn to bid, and the prompts will hint at what I should bid in precision. I expect someone has this software for sale, but if it can't be free, you can set up deals with some software operators to do this? BBO 2/1 could be written up this way...

The difference between buying the software and using offline and doing it online is that perhaps the 3, err, 2 other opponents can also 1) share the cost of using this software each time instead of buying an expensive program, 2) Benefit from real life interaction--not sure how smart and adaptible software can be.

Playing portion
When you are at a teaching table, you can opt to see "hint" which can be anything from % of chances to how to count to keeping track of HCP, anything. It could be random, it could be related to the specific deal you're playing. It would have to be something less annoying than the current smiley person who pops up when I open word/excel though...

Alternatively, this hint/suggestion could also appear at your bbo chat window, just like BM2K's, helping you keep track of cards/count.

Another thing is somewhat like the 1st part about prepared lesson deals--You used to have prepared lesson deals, although they are basic ones, dealing only with finesse and jacoby xfer. Set a few more and make it so that teaching tables will all have these files preinstalled?


----------
You didn't ask for these, but the comments I saw for tourneys/clubs were so thoughtful and all inclusive I can add no more, haha. Here are my thoughts on other sections..

Vugraph

When do we get video vugraphs? ;D

Can vugraphed deals automatically be stored in BBO? I see that 2003 world team junior champ and Spingold are there, but the rest are not...There are so many vugraphed matches now, I guess we don't need to store everything. But the most exciting and important matches can be automatically available in the server after the event, so that we can play? Thanks!

Lectures
I've never seen any lectures in BBO. I think Fred stopped giving them a long time ago. Is it possible for anyone else to give lectures? Maybe you can also have famous guest speakers. Invite Mike Lawrence or someone equally cool to come and talk...maybe they can also take this chance to promote their books. Win-win situation for bbo, authors/experts and everyone else!

I like Fred's lecture transcripts. There are only a few of them though...maybe Fred would like to give more lectures? I think it doesn't even have to be *focused* on bridge. Hey, I'll attend a talk on "The darker side of tournament bridge". It'll be fun, and you can promote it extensively, and attract a lot of new bridgers. ;D


General bridge suggestions

Is it hard to change the comparisons to 32 boards instead of 16? It can be exhilirating to win 12IMP at times, but I don't like losing 8IMP because someone skewed results.... I'm funny that way.

I would like private chat and general chat--lobby or otherwise, not directed to me to be in seperate areas. For those people who have high enough resolution and can maximise BBO window, do you think having 2 chat boxes, 1 on top for public chat, and 1 at bottom for private chat is a good idea? Having ability to do more with chat would be cool too. ie, cut, paste, delete it so your screen looks neater. Right now its in bigger font. (This has been suggested before I think, just reiterating it).

Standardised alerting procedures (I posted this before, again, repost here). I think this is a good way to instill good alerting habits in users.

BBO is a bridge focused place, thoughtfully designed that way by Fred,Sheri,Uday. I think you guys had strong views about a lot of issues and had implemented BBO to fulfil your ideals. Good job! Thanks

[mink]

Quote

Mink,

you said

"..movements must be able to deal with a decreasing number of pairs.."

Do we think this is possible, assuming we are willing to have one sitout pair?

I am quite sure that it is possible. With the current unclocked movement it should be no problem at all, and often there will be no real sitout as the sitout pair is so late for the sitout round that the next round has already started and it can continue to play by simply skipping one round.

For clocked tourneys it would require to use a simple random movement (or a swiss movement). The sitout pair should be selected randomly (among all pairs who did not sitout yet) before all other pairs are matched against each other. If there are any pairs with a missing player at the time of the round switch, they should be the candidates for the sitout. If there are 3 such pairs, one should get the sitout and the other 2 should be matched against each other.

For all kinds of tourneys it would be required that pairs could be matched across section boundaries, or to get rid of the section paradigm altogether. This would also avoid the replays in unclocked tourneys.

Along with the renunciation of subbing there should be an automatism that kicks out a pair when the frequence of actions of a player is too poor - either because of bad connection or because of simply think far to long (which often means not being at the computer). This would enable an unclocked tourney to finish even if the director encounters a severe connection problem.

All this does not mean that subbing shall be de-emplemented, but simply that it is not required anymore. But if a players asks a director to be replaced by a friend as he cannot continue for an unforeseen and urgent reason, the director should serve this request.

Karl

[hrothgar]

I'm guessing that Rain's suggestion of Video Vugraph's was a joke. Just in case it wasn't, I'd like to suggest that I am vehemently opposed to this idea on multiple grounds.

1. Video broadcast of the sort that is commonly associated with live football is very different from the services currently provided by BBO. Personally, I don't believe that there is a market for video bridge. If there were a market, my guess is that the service should be provided through a group that specializes in broadcasting sporting events.

2. Video broadcast uses enormous bandwidth. Spectators would require broadband internet to participate. Storage would start to become an important issue.

3. I don't see any significant value added from video. Face it: Watching pros tank over a card isn't the stuff broadcast is made of.

I have given a great deal of thought to improving Vugraph bridge. I believe that significant value added could be provided for spectators, however, comprehensive enhancements require that the events being broadcast be conducted in an online playing environment.

I argue that major events such as the Bermuda Bowl and the Spingold should take place electronically. Tournament organizers will provide the required software, a local server, a wireless LAN, and a broadband Internet connection. Tournament participants will need to provide their own wireless enabled personal computer.

Personally, I expect that it will take some time to transition to this type of model. As a first step, it would be interesting to see whether a major Zonal organization like the ACBL would be willing to allow experimental electronic tournaments at major events. I know that Matt Clegg was doing some experiments with this type of scenario, however, I'm not sure how far these progressed.

[uday]

I was toying with buying a cheap webcam and seeing if i could broadcast images (using one of the pay broadcast sites) for the next ABCL nationals. I've been planning this for each of the last 3 nationals, and never got around to doing it.

I know next to nothing about these things, but

a) We bandwidth to spare , at least for now
the images could be sent out via a separate web page (not embedded into the BBO client)

Do we know what the bandwidth requirements would be (from the perspective of each client) ? Are they low enough that a dialup would suffice (with some room left over for BBO) ? I dont know that i agree that broadband is required; but maybe the image would suck and the picture wouldnt be worth watching on dialup.

I agree that watching bridge pros go into the tank can be boring; but the live vugraph folks at the ACBL seem to think it is very important to have a video feed for the audience vugraph (btw, the ACBL vugraphs are broadcast to the in-house audience using BBO, and the same feed is used for the rest of us).

[hrothgar]

Forgive me if I question the "foresight" of the ACBL Vugraph operators regarding consumer demand patterns, however, I have a deep and fundamental difference of opinion regarding how this type of service should evolve.

The ACBL's notion of a Vugraph broadcast assumes that as many resources as possible should be devoted towards a single "channel". In this case, the Vugraph operators want to select a single match and build more and more services arround it.

I argue that it is more valuable to provide an electronic playing environment. Such an environment will allow complete records of an event to be save for posterity. Such an environment would allow spectators to follow the results of any table in real time, rather than the one of two matches that the organizers "believe" will be most popular.

I see nothing wrong if the ACBL wants to provide a set of value added services arround a given match (paid commentators, expert analysis, even live video). However, ideally, I'd like to see mechanisms emerge for alternative real time feeds.

In any case, I readily admit that existing "physical" Vugraph operators have much more experience that me with live Vugraph services. At the same time, I make a very good living as a technology strategist consulting firms about just these types of issues. I think that I'm right on this one.

[vincenzo]

I suggest the possibility to give average to both pairs in unclocked tournamnents so they can change to next table.
An other words give the TD the possibility to speed up unclocked tourneys

[vincenzo]

Regard private clubs:

I suggest to have the possibility to manage on the pc the list of all members. So we can modify, change, add the members on the local pc and then upload the list to the server. (Ex: the possibility to download / upload the list of members of a specific private bridge club).

Regard tournaments:

For subs: I usually try to give a sub of same country and same skill level, but it is hard to find them. I have to check the list of all subs and then go to the lobby and look at his profile .. too hard. Could be good to display flag and skill level in "show sub list".


Some tools concerning team tourneys ... (just some tools that can help us to organize a team tourney).
I will soon start a team tourney as BBO ITA, but will do all manually.

[csdenmark]

Quote

Some tools concerning team tourneys ... (just some tools that can help us to organize a team tourney).
I will soon start a team tourney as BBO ITA, but will do all manually.

Hi Vincenzo - of course you can do whatever you like - no problem with that. But please think over why we dont try to do something together. It is so hard to get something started regarding teams that it to seems not the right way that many try to run their own very small, in reality too small, teams tourneys.

• The poles will be running their own tourney
  
• Abalucy Club seems to have started a team-ladder
  
• Precision Tournament Group have a team-tournament
  
• Vincenzo starts a new team tournament

Is cooperation really so difficult that it is not worth trying to talk about how to cooperate?

[uday]

how important do you think cleaning up the clocked/unclocked movements is, as opposed to adding new movements

- team games (presumably swiss to start with, but maybe KO)
- Qualifying events ( Some percentage of the field is discarded after each XX boards )

?