[SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review

[Ann Romeo]

I like the less than 5 for free play at this tournament.  There are lots
with less than 20....
BTW, todays turnout was very small--6 teams I think, and 6.5 tables in the
pairs.  Yesterday was good, today big drop off.....

romeo​

Ann Romeo
Personal email: annromeo at gmail.com
Local home: 425-392-8417
Work email: Ann.Romeo at ORCInternational.com
Work direct dial: 212-463-6331
My cell: 425-615-1413









On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Eng, Kim <Keng at forestridge.org> wrote:

> Wow, had no idea the % was that high. What about less than 5 MP’s or less
> than 10 MP’s? The idea is to welcome new players and try to get them hooked
> on our tournaments so they can see how fun they are, right? I think once a
> player has played enough to get 10 MP’s (remember…they are much harder to
> come by when you are new…I remember it took a few scratches to get me to
> “1” J), they have already decided they enjoy the game and will continue
> coming back.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-bounces+keng=forestridge.org at mailman.
> celestial.com] *On Behalf Of *Tim White
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 9, 2016 9:26 AM
> *To:* Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review
>
>
>
> Thanks JC,
>
>
>
> Agree -- we should definitely change second session Saturday to 3:30.
>
>
>
> Also agree with re-wording to "every board matters."
>
>
>
> Re, the note about players with under 20 masterpoints play free.  Yes, we
> agreed to this at the recent board meeting, however some of us were
> discussing it with Nick yesterday at NSC.  He was surprised and alerted us
> that in 199er games at open tournaments his recollection is that on the
> order of 80% of the players have under 20 points.  That's a lot of entry
> fees.  Going to free plays for <20 points without qualification would make
> it hard to withdraw it later; the idea arose of calling it a "special" for
> this tournament and then seeing it's effects.  I'd like to hear John W's
> assessment of the potential long term financial impact of making the change
> permanent.
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Oct 9, 2016, at 8:44 AM, "Eng, Kim" <Keng at forestridge.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> I agree with Mike about possibly adjusting the start times. I am sure
> people could find a place to eat and get back in time, but it won’t be a
> relaxing lunch.
>
>
>
> Also, the write up about the BAM doesn’t make sense. It should read “every
> board matters”, not every match.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Kim
>
>
>
> *From:* Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-bounces+keng=forestridge.org at mailman.
> celestial.com] *On Behalf Of *JC Chupack
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 8, 2016 9:10 AM
> *To:* Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
> *Subject:* [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry about the delay on this. I ended up with less time on Thurs/Fri than
> I anticipated (but I picked up some silver points at the Las Vegas
> sectional, so yay!).
>
> Attached is the draft Sweetheart Sectional flyer for the board's review.
> This includes all the modifications we discussed at the past two unit board
> meetings, including location set to Bothell Union Hall.
>
> Please review by 6pm on Monday.  (In particular, Tim, since you're my
> co-chair, if you could sign off affirmatively, I'd appreciate it.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> JC
>
> --
> JC Chupack
>
> * Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbuboard mailing list
> Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbuboard mailing list
> Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/sbuboard/attachments/20161009/3ac43672/attachment.html>