[SBU Board] Eliminating sit outs

[Ann Romeo]

make the the UW Club (My spelling is bad, and spell check is not automatic,
apologies)...a

Ann Romeo
Personal email: annromeo at gmail.com
Local home: 206-526-0871
Work email: Ann.Romeo at ORCInternational.com
Work direct dial: 212-463-6331
My cell: 425-615-1413 (text ok)









On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Ann Romeo <annromeo at gmail.com> wrote:

> FYI, US Club has good internet, but I'd want John K and Daniel in on any
> discussion.
>
> Sit outs are a pain, and smaller games (the dreaded 2.5 tables)...
> anything to avoid that!  this might be a nice solution.
>
> let's add this to the agenda next month, or....should Eric create a
> committee (Bill, Tim, others?) and report to us about this option?    I'm
> not sure what we get out of a full-board discussion over more informed
> commentary by those in the know who have perhaps reached out to clubs and
> sources to address some of the issued raised in this email exchange.
>
> thoughts?
>
> a
>
> Ann Romeo
> Personal email: annromeo at gmail.com
> Local home: 206-526-0871 <(206)%20526-0871>
> 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)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 4:03 PM, William Campbell <jwccsllc at me.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180118/81af520a/attachment-0001.html>