[SBU Board] Eliminating sit outs

[Eric Sieg]

inline

Tim White wrote:
> Thanks Eric.  The fresh thinking and new ideas are appreciated.  This seems (at least to me) to be an out-of-the-box idea, worthy of discussion.  Prior to potentially formally raising the idea with the clubs, I suggest we first discuss it amongst ourselves live as a body, to (1) collectively understand and consider the issues and pros&  cons, (2) determine what we might be willing to do in the way of support (financial and otherwise) of a hypothetical implementation and (3) determine how we would approach the clubs, if we were to decide to do so.
>
> Some initial thoughts:
> 1.  If it's dependent on solid wifi connectivity, this could be a problem at some club locations.
Not sure about connectivity at the small clubs, but 
SBC/EBC/Mercercrest/Mercer Island/Alki all have reliable wifi. Not sure 
on UW. Can always tether via a mobile phone at UW if necessary. No 
experience with the other clubs like Halcyon, LeEtta King, Emerald, and 
Des Moines.
>
> 2.  There is a finite probability that a tablet will lock up or otherwise fail; are there established protocols for how a director handles such a situation (e.g. throw out all boards for all rounds played against robots and subsequent rounds revert to sit outs)?
No clue :) While a tablet failing seems very unlikely (I've worked with 
a variety for years without an issue), there might be a problem if the 
battery on one runs out and it isn't convenient to recharge at the 
table. It seems like the directors would have a few choices (mark the 
rest as NP, throw them out for two) but not sure if we should recommend 
something or let them make a decision if it ever comes up.
>
> 3.  Patrons of some clubs are more likely to be experienced and comfortable with electronic play and play against robots than those of other clubs.  I can envision that at some U446 clubs many players would not be at all comfortable.  Would we insist that club managers poll to get data on players' interest/willingness before we consider or commit to investment/support for implementation?  Would we support investment/implementation if only one club were interested?
Some way of understanding interest or of trialing this occasionally to 
get feedback might be a good idea. Maybe setting this up for a day game 
or two at SBC and/or EBC and then getting feedback might be an early 
step to see what people think?
>
> 4.  Robots (on BBO at least) can be "gamed" by live players in some bidding or play circumstances.  Players experienced in play with/against robots could thus gain an advantage -- which might even affect the results for the entire field in a game with overall awards where NS and EW results are integrated -- especially if the boards they play vs robots are not "flat."
I think the robots are generally better than people give them credit 
for. The "best hand" robot games are bad in my opinion because you have 
more information, can count out to know 100% where an honor is, and 
psyching is safer. While 2 robots might make mistakes that humans would 
not, I wouldn't be surprised if they performed better than your average 
opponent at a club game. Clubs mentioned marking them as not eligible 
for this reason - otherwise they would take masterpoints from the humans.
>
> 5.  Some might have a concern with security.  While we would like to think all players are 100% ethical, the absence of live OPPs at the table might invite inappropriate behavior on the part of a particular pair.  For example, apart from the possibility of UI such as visual cues across the table (which could especially be a problem when there is a playing director), players self-alert on BBO against live OPPs.  I have no idea whether self alerts would actually be processed/used by robots' algorithms, but if they are then how would players' conformance with a self-alerting requirement be policed?
Not sure on this without firsthand experience. People usually mention 
putting the robot table near the director table but I'm not sure how 
that would apply at clubs like Mercercrest where there are playing 
directors. Self alerts are irrelevant, robots don't parse them or pay 
attention to them. Main thing is people transmitting UI without a human 
to let the director know, but lots of UI goes unreported anyway. 
Hopefully being near a director or at least in a table next to other 
humans would put a damper on attempts to intentionally transmit UI for 
most people if not everyone.
>
> 6.  This concept might be of particular interest/value at games that especially target newer players, i.e. UW and limited games at clubs elsewhere, where it could be advantageous to get inexperienced players as many boards of play as possible.
Yep, or at smaller games with longer sitouts. I hate a 2 board sitout 
and frequently scheme to avoid one; a 4 or 5 board sitout would be brutal.
>
> 7.  Before discussing this live as a group, I would like to have insight as to where and how many clubs have implemented it, how it has gone, and a sense of associated successes/failures.
Will try to get an idea on this.
>
> Tim
>
> On Jan 17, 2018, at 7:03 PM, Eric Sieg<easieg at gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've heard people mention robot fill ins more frequently in random conversations. Apparently this is becoming more popular where instead of having to sit out 2-5 boards, you still get to play them but it is against robots.
>>
>> BW link here: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/no-more-sit-outs-at-our-bridge-club/
>>
>> Instructions on how to run it here: http://www.bridgewebs.com//pcba/Robots%20for%20Half%20Tables.pdf
>>
>> There was also an article in the July 2017 Bridge Bulletin
>>
>> Is this something that we should explore interest in at the clubs? Maybe buying two tablets (Kindle HD 8 is $80/tablet on Amazon) for interested clubs and then helping them get set up to do this would be a way we can help them out.
>>
>> Curious about what other people think and might have heard. If we wanted to do something as a board I'm fine with putting in the time to help clubs with setup, but mostly just looking to spark conversation/get people thoughts/etc for the moment.
>>
>> Eric
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180118/41688aef/attachment.html>