[SBU Board] Eliminating sit outs

[William Campbell]

On Jan 18, 2018, at 12:37 PM, Eric Sieg <easieg at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.

If it's necessary to use a mobile phone's hotspot, it may be necessary to have a cheap router available to provide WiFi and DHCP to the game tablets.  I have several 10/100 LinkSys routers here I could donate for this.  This would work where Internet access is via a USB adapter on the director's machine as well which might be a better option than using a mobile hotspot as it doesn't depend on battery status on a mobile phone.
>> 
>> 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.

How does BBO handle a dropped line by a user who then reconnects?  Can they rejoin the table without losing data?
>> 
>> 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?

I think this is up to the individual clubs with the board providing some technical support as needed.

...
>> 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.

I can talk with Barbara Nist about trying this at her Mercer Island club which has a lot of newer players, and usually plays 4 or 5 board rounds.

Bill