[jtfanclub]

When it's Deer Pard or Fun Fishy? Sure.

Quote

And JT.... it is very interesting why you say you have to wait to start your tourney.. you say you schedule  yours 10 or 15 mintues after some other one is suppose to be finished.. then IF THEY RUN LONG, you start bumping yours back.

It's always the last round...it has to be. I don't set up my tourneys with more than about 40 minutes before game time. So what happens is that directors turn off the clock for the last round, and there's 125 people (or more) watching the last few people finish the last round (which can take a VERY long time on rare occassions). So when they finally finish, these 125 people look at their results and then a goodly number of them see what else is out there. If I started a minute ago, too bad for them.

[spwdo]

Dont delay tourneys, soo frustrating and when ppl start with a bad feeling that will result in bad atmosphered tourneys, nobody benefits, at least have courtesy to state it in your conditions of contest that u will delay in order to have a table more or less.


When i held my bridge too far, i posted it at 12.30 edt, and 30 minutes before messages start to come in, please delay 5 minutes, we playing this and that.Its always the same story so one knows in front, then i delayed 5 minutes and thats it.

I seen many tourneys delaying , delaying, delaying in order to get recordtables resulting in more then usual subs needed, so what can be the benefit?

Some pppl dont participate in unclocked tourneys given the fact they dodnt know when its going to end so therefore dont make clocked unclocked with ongoing delays, timemodifications.

Marc

[TimG]

I think one solution is from the software side. In most tournament movements, there is no need for everyone to wait when a small number of tables are behind. In a face-to-face tournament when a table is late, the round is still called, those who move can, and those who can't wait. Players tend to catch up, though there are certainly cases of habitually slow players who are unable to catch up. It may be a pain to program at the start, but it doesn't seem like it should be so difficult to preclude the same thing from happening in an online environment.

Actually, the online environment would be ideal for this. The software could track how often a player (or pair) is late and assign something of an ontime rating. Then a tournament director could restrict entry to players with a certain ontime percentage in an effort to have a speedy tournament. Of course, this would be optional.

Tim

PS 24 minutes is way too much for a three board round.

[luke warm]

jt's attitude shows exactly why this problem won't be solved... it's obvious that he sees absolutely nothing wrong with moving the start time... to others of us, this is the exact reason we don't play in some tourneys... it IS important, especially if one is on a schedule of sorts

[jtfanclub]

luke warm, on Sep 1 2004, 03:38 PM, said:

jt's attitude shows exactly why this problem won't be solved... it's obvious that he sees absolutely nothing wrong with moving the start time... to others of us, this is the exact reason we don't play in some tourneys... it IS important, especially if one is on a schedule of sorts

You're absolutely right.

It IS very important, especially when one is on a schedule.

When you see a Two Hour Tourney set up to start at 6:30, it will be over before 8:30. If I start five minutes late, it will still be over by 8:30. If I throw some extra time in during a round, it will still be over by 8:30. When you sign up for a Two Hour Tourney, you are signing up for two hours. Not how long you think a 16 board tourney should take, or whatever you get by multiplying X by Z. Two hours, from the moment of scheduled start.

The problem isn't that I'm taking longer than scheduled. The problem is that people decide that my tourney should take as long as they think it should take, using some arbitrary number. If you think my tourney should take 96 minutes, and I start 5 minutes late and take extra time on the first round and it takes 112 minutes, tough. You were warned how long the tourney can take. My opinion of people who join the tourney anyways and are shocked...shocked when a tourney takes as long as it says it's going to take is not very high. And then they quit at the start of the last round and slow things down for the rest of the people as I scramble for subs.

If you can't stay, don't play.

I feel there's nothing to apologize for in that.

[jtfanclub]

Hmmmm...

It has been pointed out to me that while when you look at a tournament, you cannot see how many minutes per round it is, when you get invited it does show you that information, and it does not show you the description. I was unaware of this.

This, IMHO, is a mistake. Either the minutes per board should be public on the initial screen when you enter a tourney between the number of boards and number of rounds, or it should be hidden. I think the problem here is that I am looking at the description screen, and others are looking at the invite screen, and they come to very different conclusions. And that's why we can't come to an agreement.

Sorry.

EDIT: I 'spoke' with Uday, and he says adding the T-Descs to the invite is on the list, though no promises about when it will happen (or what year, for that matter). Can we settle on once this is fixed, then a TD who puts in the T-desc that the minutes per board (and start time for that matter) is fixed, or flexible, or there's a set length of time regardless of minutes per board, that that is good and fine and proper as long as the TD sticks to it? And that until this gets fixed, we're going to have this suffering going on and there isn't much we can do to solve it and there's not much of a point in getting upset over it?

[luke warm]

but there is something that can be done... start the tourney on time...

[doofik]

JT,

I have a certain expectation when I sign up for a tourney. One of them is that the start time will be adhered to. Once that is done I can pretty much predict the tourney's duration expecially when the time of rounds is in the description.

What do you find wrong with this picture?

Jola

[jtfanclub]

doofik, on Sep 2 2004, 04:14 PM, said:

JT,

I have a certain expectation when I sign up for a tourney. One of them is that the start time will be adhered to. Once that is done I can pretty much predict the tourney's duration expecially when the time of rounds is in the description.

What do you find wrong with this picture?

Jola

I have a certain expectation when you sign up for my tourney. It is that you have signed up to be in the entire tourney, not until you get bored or have something to go to. And the tourney lasts as long as the TD says it will last, not as long as you've decided it will last.

If you can't handle an extra ten or fifteen minutes of slack, DON'T SIGN UP. Every tourney, no matter how hard they try to adhere to a schedule, might get delayed. I don't report people to abuse who show up for a two hour tourney and then quit after an hour and forty-five minutes because they have something else they'd rather do.

Maybe if if I started, they'd stop.

[Gerben47]

Quote

The problem isn't that I'm taking longer than scheduled. The problem is that people decide that my tourney should take as long as they think it should take, using some arbitrary number

You are completely wrong here. A tourney should take as long as advertized, therefore a tourney with 12 boards at 8 minutes / board should take 12 x 8 = 96 minutes. Not 96 + whatever the TD feels like.

If you don't feel this is right play UNCLOCKED tournaments. The whole point of having a clock is so everyone knows when the tourney is finished.

[jtfanclub]

Gerben47, on Sep 3 2004, 03:45 AM, said:

The whole point of having a clock is so everyone knows when the tourney is finished.

Really? Then why, when you look at a tournament, is the mintues per board not listed? In fact, in an individual, I don't know how you'd even figure out what the minutes per board are if it's not in the description.

Think of another reason.

[spwdo]

hi Mathew,

I for one think the minutes per baord shoud be listed, as much info as possible so players wont encounter surprises, like the playing , not adjusting, alert psychic td.


I also think that a listed tourney shoud start on time.Because players that are signed up cant do anything else, once u see a tourney with 2 minutes till start many partnerships are formed that want to play instant , if they know it will delay many woud not sign up, anyways when u delay all that are signed up get irritated(take it from a oldtimer) at least, u dont want them in your tourneys in that condition,

U delay means the one short after you seeting something up that will start when yours ends will have to delay.

Life is all about waiting and not many ppl like it so why add to negative fact of life, there will always be a tourney that is going to end in short, and another short after that, if u wait till yours is the only one someone will jump in front of you

Not fun waiting,very unplaesant seeing a time till start going up.

Ppl do their math and predict when something is going to finisch, messing up their schedule is not friendly gesture .

Regards

Marc

[doofik]

JT,

I think I can solve your problem and mine at the same time. When you post your tourneys enter a description that it will start at your will and it is unclocked. Now it will be fair to all of us and we can make an informed choice whether to sign up or not.

Jola

[hrothgar]

I very prefer that tournaments have predictable start/stop times and get quite peeved when the tournament start times continually get delayed.

One point that seems worth mentioning:

The decision to delay a tournament start time (thereby pushing out the date at which the event ends) has a real tendency to snowball. Many director's note that the main reason that they delay start times is to permit players to finish other tournaments... See the problem?

[jtfanclub]

doofik, on Sep 3 2004, 07:51 AM, said:

JT,

I think I can solve your problem and mine at the same time. When you post your tourneys enter a description that it will start at your will and it is unclocked. Now it will be fair to all of us and we can make an informed choice whether to sign up or not.

Jola

I have a better idea. How about I post that it'll last two hours from scheduled start, and it lasts two hours from scheduled start?

I am not going to make my tourneys take forever just so you can leave with a board to go anyways because you figured you'd finish the last round early and you were wrong.

I'm just curious, have any of you actually played in a club? They have a start time- which may be moved a few minutes due to traffic or whatever. They have a clock- which is not strictly adhered to. This is because there are actual people playing. It is not solitaire, it is not you and 200 robots.

There is no snowball effect. Tourneys are either set up days in advance, in which case they aren't set to start a couple of minutes after somebody finishes, or they are set up an hour or less in advance, which means if the tourney before them delays they get to see it before they set up their own.

Even if I were to start every time on time, even if I were to be a slave to the clock and adjust a dozen boards a round which turns the game into God knows what but certainly not bridge, I STILL wouldn't want people joining who don't have about 15 minutes of slack. Things happen.

I dare any of you to try this with actual, face to face humans. Make a doctor's appointment for 4:00 and have somewhere to be at 5:00. It normally takes 30 minutes to drive to work, so leave exactly 30 minutes before you have to be there. Or, go play bridge, and three hours and thirty one minutes into the game walk out because hey, 28*7.5=210.

No, the only time people pull that stunt is on the computer, because it's easy to be rude and without consideration on a computer.

When you do your calculations, add a minute per round of slack. You're already doing the multiplication, add one before you do it. Simple as that. If you find you don't have that much slack, don't play. Doesn't matter if the TD thinks and does every effort to keep the tourney moving. You don't have the slack, you don't play. Just like everything else in real life.

That'll solve your problem and mine at the same time. And unlike your solution, it doesn't change the tournament a bit, and isn't rude to the other players.

Think you can handle it?

[doofik]

JT,

I don't have a problem with adding a minute per round, that's easy. However, my biggest complaint is with the start time. When you start your tourney 10-15-20 minutes after the posted time and THEN you start adding a minute or two per round - pull out your calculator please and you figure it out. Now my 15 minutes of "slack time" doesn't calculate, does it?

My tone might be harsh but this is something that drives me bonkers.

Jola

[luke warm]

this really gets to me, i don't see the problem... don't the acbl tourneys start when they're supposed to? what in the world is wrong with any other one doing the same?

this isn't the same as r/l bridge... yes, things like traffic probs can delay the arrival of players... but in clubs they don't habitually, as a matter of course, start 10 minutes late.. i guarantee that if you started all your tourneys at the time you said they'd start, people would start showing up on time... and if all tds did the same, soon this would be a non-issue

i'm not talking about having to extend the odd round for one reason or another... as you said, things do happen... i'm talking about the start time... it makes no sense to see these times extended from the published start time

[jtfanclub]

doofik, on Sep 3 2004, 11:07 AM, said:

JT,

I don't have a problem with adding a minute per round, that's easy. However, my biggest complaint is with the start time. When you start your tourney 10-15-20 minutes after the posted time and THEN you start adding a minute or two per round - pull out your calculator please and you figure it out. Now my 15 minutes of "slack time" doesn't calculate, does it?

My tone might be harsh but this is something that drives me bonkers.

Jola

I do understand. Just as the TDs can go too far with the strict application of the clock, so they can with shifting things around. I've never delayed a tourney more than 5 mintues, I've never asked a TD to delay a tourney more than five minutes to allow mine to finish. I keep track of things like when a tourney gets delayed on start and don't add minutes during the tourney.

I *do* need slack, which tends to be about 1 minute per round, and can be as high as 1 minute per board. People who don't factor that in are one of my biggest frustrations. A bigger frustration is TDs who start their tourneys early, but never mind that. If you factor in a slack of one minute per board, I promise, you will finish my tourney on time.

That's all I ask for.

[doofik]

JT,

I think we've arrived at a consensus.

Thank you,

Jola

[nilbes]

hi,
I've had the same complaints about tournament starting time being dragged out and about the clocked rounds which were never clocked so I sat in front of my PC for hours.... :-((

Want to know how I resolved this: by entering almost all tournaments possible when having ample time getting to know the reliable directors:-))) and there are a lot of them let me tell you (have an opportunity to thank them dearly here) and then I just registered to tournies directed by those directors:-))
Took me a lot of time to do this but know I am happily playing in those tournaments where everything goes by the book:-))

The important thing is just to get to know the directors that's all no need to stop playing in tournaments my dear friend:-))