[SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Postmortem notes

Mon Mar 6 12:16:10 PST 2017

Just to keep from muddying the topics, if you want to further discuss
single vs. double sessions, please review the separate document on single
vs. double sessions that I sent out (last month and this month - sam doc)
and provide feedback on that topic in that thread if you won't be at this
or the next meeting (as I doubt we'll resolve it tonight).  The decision on
session setup is bigger than a Sweetheart postmortem, as it's a call we
need to make for all our tournaments, not just this one.  I don't want to
lose thoughts or feedback on that topic because it's intermixed with
Sweetheart postmortem notes.

Thanks all,
JC

--
JC Chupack
* Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:39 AM, <michaelring304 at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm not going to be able to make the meeting tonight, so just wanted to
> add my $0.02 on a couple of things...
>
> Regarding the issues with Sunday Swiss length and lunch break, if we stop
> serving lunch - and I think the reasons stated in earlier e-mails are good
> reasons for doing so - it follows we need a longer break, and then less
> time at the game itself. But, what if we can use that time more
> efficiently? The biggest waste of time at the Swiss teams is always the
> wait for new matches between rounds. With fewer, longer rounds we'd have
> less of that. Would a 6 round, 9 boards/round format be able to serve all
> masters in terms of compressing the time of the event while losing only 2
> boards of bridge against our current normal practice?
>
> I also want to state my opposition to turning the Saturday pairs into
> single session events, at least for the open section. I think having a
> 2-session event gives a little more weight and prestige to the event, and
> makes winning more special than for a single session event. I think that's
> more important to the open players than total masterpoint yield. If we can
> keep A a double-session but make BCD two single sessions, it sounds like
> that might make the most people happy?
>
> Thanks, Mike
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Eric Sieg" <easieg at gmail.com>
> *To: *"Seattle ACBL Unit Board" <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
> *Sent: *Monday, March 6, 2017 10:29:49 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Postmortem notes
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Dumping some feedback here since its probably more time efficient to dump
> longer thoughts via email rather than sharing them at the meeting. Then we
> can save tonight for discussion.
>
> Fast pairs leading into a 10:30 start sounds like a cool idea. That might
> pull people in who were concerned about a late evening followed by a
> morning start. That said, I think it would be incredibly sad to remove the
> BAM event completely. There are very few opportunities to play the BAM
> format outside of nationals and there are hundreds of opportunities to play
> matchpoints and dozens of opportunities to play Swiss and KOs. While some
> don't like them (especially outside the A set), they are something that
> those who do like them tend to look forward to and be excited about. Even
> if its a minority of players that love them, it seems like a good idea to
> still occasionally give that minority the event that they love. They are
> constituents as well and I think part of our mission should be to look
> after all groups rather than just the simple majority in every decision.
> Maybe we move the BAM event to a Friday evening in a sectional that is
> still afternoon/evening on Saturday next year?
>
> A 2nd round clock would be good. The unit used to have one but it wasn't
> present at the Feb sectional. Maybe we should purchase another?
>
> Having 750 and 2500 as options seemed very popular
>
> Shortening the Sunday Swiss would be a bummer! Maybe instead we could
> explore starting it a bit earlier? Especially after a 10:30 start time on
> Saturday, starting at 10 on Sunday seems feasible.
>
> For single vs two session pairs: It seems like the A set generally prefers
> 2 sessions and the BCD prefer single session events. Maybe do it like
> February but move the 2500 pairs event to single session as well? Another
> idea might be tweaking the flyers to make it more obvious that you can
> still play a single session for the two session events. I've seen something
> along the lines of "single session entries available" mentioned on other
> flyers. It also seems a lot less important to offer two single sessions on
> a daylight schedule because we're not pushing the end time super late. For
> the open, 2 sessions seems a lot better since it rewards consistency vs an
> unusually lucky session. I know I was pretty bummed to see Fircrest is two
> single sessions when looking at upcoming tournaments.
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 3:18 PM, William Campbell <jwccsllc at me.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 4, 2017, at 5:08 PM, Ann Romeo <annromeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> My weigh-in (I'm away until Tuesday, and don't think calling in makes
>> sense at Starbucks...)
>>
>> A cart is a great idea--sometimes venues have these, and they may our
>> lives a lot easier (think Vasa).  However, there will always be schlepping
>> --as coffee needs to be dumped and baskets need to be rinsed before fresh
>> pots are made.  We may want to have a 5 gallon slop bucket, but actually I
>> think some of this needs to be done away from the maddening crowds, for
>> both safety and aesthetics....  BUT using a combo of water pitcher/jugs and
>> a cart will make a lot of this a lot easier.  All comes down to room in the
>> trailer.
>>
>>
>> A cart takes quite a bit of space, probably more than is available in the
>> trailer.  Are there carts available that fold/break down?
>>
>> Single session for everything?  I wonder?  For A events, eg, open pairs,
>> there may be more people getting awards, but certainly the value goes
>> down.  I wonder if we can't make a compromise and make open events 2
>> session events,  and bcd single session (but I'm not sure if that is better
>> for things like gold rush pairs, where bigger points are awarded for pairs
>> that can put together a good day's worth of bridge).  I have a feeling that
>> A players want the bigger pay offs (and if we're going to make a blanket
>> change, I think we need to poll specifically As to see).  Just my
>> thoughts....I'll never forget one time doing well in both sessions of an
>> open and number of points awarded for me and my partner's
>> efforts--glorious.....
>>
>>
>> Personally I prefer the 2-session events as they reward consistency, not
>> to mention that the most points I've won in a sectional event was in
>> February 2013 when Ted Bartunek and I won the 0-2000 pairs game (getting us
>> almost twice as many as when we won the 2-session Open pairs event on
>> Friday 2014 :-).
>>
>> Lunch breaks are long for those who finish fast, and sometimes too short
>> for those who don't.  I've been in both situations.
>>
>> I like the idea of encouraging people to bring their lunch from home--but
>> we also need to stress, NO REFRIGERATION, so that people don't expect us to
>> store their food (this happens pretty near every time, btw--people want to
>> store food, and take ice...)....
>>
>> And I can always use some help.  hiring someone makes sense.  Sometimes
>> we've been lucky and I've been able to enlist the aid of Jenny Ballantyne
>> and/or Dee Patrick.  But here's something key--strength and size matters.
>> There was a time caddies (especially Laurie's son) was able to help and was
>> perfect, but them days are long gone.  Let's talk about this when I'm
>> back...
>>
>> I LOVE the idea of fast pairs on Friday when we have a 7ish start (and
>> recommend 7:15 start,btw), and the next day a 10:30 start.  LOVE LOVE LOVE
>> IT, and suspect it will be VERY popular.  Did I say I love fast pairs when
>> we have an early start the next day??
>>
>>
>> I like fast pairs as well.  The Friday evening games always seem to have
>> fewer players than the afternoon.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170306/afa0948b/attachment.html>