[SBU Board] NLLM Spring Sectional

Thu May 11 19:08:29 PDT 2017

Re: the rules for accepting single sessions, I had misunderstood something
said at the Sweetheart, so apologies to the board for the confusion on
that.  I'm glad we have a firm answer now. :)

Regarding the specific folks affected for this NLM that contacted us to
complain, what have we done or what did we do?

For my part, I'm in favor of refunding their entry.  They didn't understand
what was going on, and that's on us, not them.  I'd rather retain them for
a future tournament than lose them over this.

Thanks,
JC

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

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:25 PM, William Campbell <jwccsllc at me.com> wrote:

> Perhaps removing the limit in the single-session pairs game to allow
> people who want to play a single session, and not allow single-sessions in
> the Swiss.
>
> On May 10, 2017, at 11:29 AM, JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Excellent clarification...thanks. :)  In that case, for the Swiss at
> least, I think we have a simple solution. Up to the board as to whether we
> want to offer single session Swiss for the NLM or offer 2-session and
> prohibit single session entry.
>
> Jenni - just to confirm, we are required to accommodate single session
> entries for pairs events, right?  That is, it's not a "turning people away"
> logical decision, it's an ACBL rule.
>
> --
> JC Chupack
> * Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Jennifer Carmichael <
> jenni.carmichael at acbl.org> wrote:
>
>> The ACBL does not require that we accept single session entries for a
>> Swiss. We should do that when running 2 session pair events otherwise you
>> are turning people away and losing business. But we do not, nor should we
>> (imho), be offering single session "ok" events for the Swiss.
>>
>> Jenni
>>
>> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:01:39 AM
>> *To:* Tim White
>> *Cc:* Seattle ACBL Unit Board; Jennifer Carmichael
>> *Subject:* Re: NLLM Spring Sectional
>>
>> I do happen to know a good bit about this but only because I researched
>> single vs. double session and the reasoning behind them, not so much
>> related to tournament events comm.
>>
>> So, here we go again into the storm... :D  I'm CCing Jenni so she can
>> correct me if I say anything wrong here, as I'm an "armchair ref" and she's
>> the real deal. :)
>>
>> We do not have the option to deny a single session entry for a two
>> session event.  We did not "run a single session Swiss"...we indicated that
>> single session entries are okay, and in fact, we are required to accept
>> single session entries by the ACBL.
>>
>> If we had run a single session Swiss instead, they might receive overall
>> awards.  The reason they didn't is because we ran a two session, and they
>> only played one session.  The same disadvantage applies when players enter
>> a 2-session pairs as a single session entry.
>>
>> FWIW, this is why I think putting "single session entry OK" on flyers is
>> a bad idea. Historically, we have put this on the NLM flyers (as far back
>> as I have archives of flyers), probably because NLM players often want to
>> play one session.  But a single session entry into a two session event is a
>> terrible thing to do to players.  It is not a state we should encourage but
>> rather support when players request it.
>>
>> My view is that if players want single session events, we should run
>> single session events.  The criticism that we're cheating players out of
>> the value of their entry by having them enter two session events with a
>> single session entry is valid.  If our belief is that NLM events will have
>> lots of people wanting to play single session, we should make the events
>> single session rather than boldly stating "single session entry OK" on
>> flyers.
>>
>> JC
>>
>> --
>> JC Chupack
>> * Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack
>>
>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Tim White <trkwhite at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi JC,
>>>
>>> Please read the email string below.  Two players in the NLM on Sunday
>>> were disappointed with the awards for the single session Swiss, unaware
>>> that the event does not award overalls.  We'll need to respond to them.  In
>>> doing so we should consider whether and what to say about the destiny of
>>> this event going forward, and/or whether clarification on the flyer is
>>> enough.  Perhaps your experience/knowledge from the events committee would
>>> be helpful in this consideration.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>> *From: *Jennifer Carmichael <jenni.carmichael at acbl.org>
>>> *Subject: **Fwd: Re: Fwd: NLLM Spring Sectional*
>>> *Date: *May 9, 2017 7:50:00 PM PDT
>>> *To: *Tim White <trkwhite at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Patti McCallum
>>> Sent: Monday, May 8, 3:13 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Fwd: NLLM Spring Sectional
>>> To: Ann Romeo
>>> Cc: Jennifer Carmichael
>>>
>>>
>>> We can not do a single session swiss again.  They were very unhappy.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from myMail app for Android
>>>
>>> Monday, 08 May 2017, 09:46AM -07:00 from Ann Romeo <annromeo at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> I think we need a clean, clear explanation for these gentlemen.  I
>>> understand what they don't get....the ranking doesn't hold unless it holds
>>> throughout the 6 round event.  Playing single session Swiss does not award
>>> you the results of a full session swiss.  They did win something, for
>>> winning a round, but not the total match awards--they did not play the
>>> total match.
>>>
>>>
>>> We needed to be clear about why they shouldn't have played single
>>> session swiss, and really, probably not offer that in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ann Romeo
>>> Personal email: annromeo at gmail.com
>>>
>>> Local home: 425-392-8417 <(425)%20392-8417>
>>> Work email: Ann.Romeo at ORCInternational.com
>>>
>>> Work direct dial: 212-463-6331 <(212)%20463-6331>
>>>
>>> My cell: 425-615-1413 <(425)%20615-1413> (text ok)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: *Rodney Waldbaum* <rwaldbaum at lesourd.com>
>>> Date: Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:33 PM
>>> Subject: RE: NLLM Spring Sectional
>>> To: Ted Klastorin <tedkuw at gmail.com>, annromeo at gmail.com,
>>> pattimcbridge at gmail.com
>>> Cc: Steve & Anya Levy-Smith <stevenlevy at hotmail.com>, Carl Berkenwald <
>>> berkenwald at comcast.net>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ann and Patti,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Ted, we do appreciate all of your efforts.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our team played 24 boards in an 11 table Swiss team event.   For the
>>> morning session, we were first in C, tied for first in B, and tied for
>>> second in A.  We should receive master points based on that.   Those that
>>> ply both sessions are eligible for greater points because they are being
>>> scored based on 48 boards.  If that is not the case, it should be clear
>>> before our team invests our time, effort and $40 registration fee.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rodney Waldbaum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Rodney J. Waldbaum*
>>>
>>> Attorney At Law
>>> LeSourd & Patten, P.S.
>>> 600 University Street, Suite 2401
>>> Seattle, Washington  98101
>>> (206) 624-1040 (main)
>>>
>>> (206) 357-5087 (direct)
>>>
>>> (206) 223-1099 (fax)
>>>
>>> rwaldbaum at lesourd.com
>>>
>>> www.lesourd.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Ted Klastorin [mailto:tedkuw at gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 7, 2017 9:57 PM
>>> *To:* annromeo at gmail.com; pattimcbridge at gmail.com
>>> *Cc:* Steve & Anya Levy-Smith <stevenlevy at hotmail.com>; Rodney J.
>>> Waldbaum <rwaldbaum at lesourd.com>; Carl Berkenwald <
>>> berkenwald at comcast.net>
>>> *Subject:* NLLM Spring Sectional
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Ann and Patti:
>>>
>>> Thanks for co-chairing the NLM Spring Sectional this weekend at the
>>> Seattle Bridge Center.  I know that these tournaments take a lot of work
>>> and those of us who play greatly appreciate your efforts.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, I have to protest one item.  The Swiss pairs today were
>>> advertised as either a single session or a double session (see attached)..
>>> But the scoring was done only for the double session; it appears that our
>>> score was calculated as a zero for the second session (we could not play
>>> the second session).  If that is true, please make this clear in future
>>> flyers; if we had been aware of this scoring, we would have simply played
>>> pairs.  At least, please indicate in the final scoring the teams that only
>>> played one session.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ted Klastorin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170511/09c42b1a/attachment-0001.html>