[SBU Board] Vasa schdule--quick vote

[Ann Romeo]

��

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, 5:29 PM JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com> wrote:

> Revised flyer based on the voting. Comments welcome!
>
> --
> JC Chupack
> Seattle ACBL Unit 446 <http://bridgeinseattle.org> Secretary, Electronic
> Contact, & Publicity Chair
>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 5:14 PM, JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yep, based on the description of choice pairs, I'm now against that.  So,
>> my vote is 1. No third session, 2. If we do a third session, just regular
>> open pairs single session (no BAM or FP).
>>
>> --
>> JC Chupack
>> Seattle ACBL Unit 446 <http://bridgeinseattle.org> Secretary, Electronic
>> Contact, & Publicity Chair
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Patti McCallum <pattimcbridge at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> After reading Rays description of choice pairs and with the short time
>>> between sessions it sounds like it is best to do only 2 sessions
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2018, at 4:35 PM, Eric Sieg <easieg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm a yes vote for 3 sessions regardless of choice pairs. I think fast
>>> pairs is fine too. A big part of that is part of the discussion last year
>>> was that we should try it for two years before making any permanent
>>> decisions. I think that holds true for both the daytime pairs and the fast
>>> pairs (imo). I didn't actually think of the "not single sessions" aspect of
>>> choice pairs, just remembered doing it and people liking it elsewhere. I
>>> would be amenable to Friday now needing 2 sessions though since
>>> Morning/Afternoon isn't particularly great for worker bees anyway so the
>>> benefit (can just play the evening session) becomes a lot less relevant.
>>>
>>> That said, while I think its right to try 3 sessions with a fast for one
>>> more year, I don't feel nearly as strongly about it as some other things.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>> p.s. I'm a no vote on holding a BAM in the 3rd session regardless of
>>> everything else. I think its a fast pairs or choice pairs or no bridge.
>>>
>>> Ann Romeo wrote:
>>>
>>> There are some issues with Choice Pairs from what I understand.
>>>
>>>    - There will be three completely different set of boards, so comps
>>>    are a bit wonky.
>>>    - Participants must play in two of the three sessions--if you are
>>>    working, you cannot play in one session and place in the overalls.
>>>    - It still means very short meal breaks if you play in two back to
>>>    back sessions
>>>    - and it means that those who do play in the evening have a short
>>>    night before coming back and playing on Saturday...
>>>
>>> The votes I've counted to date are as follows, BUT some have not been in
>>> the loop re Choice Pairs (Mike, Tim, John), and should send me a new
>>> vote--or if you want tochange your vote, send it to me
>>>
>>> Ann:  Yes for third session
>>> Bill: Yes for third session, IF a Choice pairs
>>> Eric: Yes for third session, IF a Choice pairs
>>> JC: No, but would be amenable to Choice pairs.
>>> Monty: No, but would be amenable to Choice pairs
>>> Patti: Yes for third session
>>> Larry: No
>>> Ray: No
>>> Mike: No
>>> Tim: No
>>> John: No
>>>
>>> Do I have your pov right?  let me know.  And look at Ray's comments...he
>>> really hates this idea....
>>>
>>> Ann
>>>
>>> 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 Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 6:12 PM, Monty Gray <mlgrayjr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I vote for no third session.  I’m not familiar with choice pairs, but
>>>> if it works the way it sounds, I’d favor that if we’re going to have a
>>>> third session.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since some Unit members prefer morning-afternoon and some prefer
>>>> afternoon-evening, and some (but not all) feel strongly about it,  I think
>>>> it’s appropriate to have one schedule at some sectionals and the other
>>>> schedule at other sectionals.   We can’t please everyone all the time, and
>>>> we shouldn’t knock ourselves out trying to figure out how to do so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I’m fine with putting a BAM event into the program for the KO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Monty Gray
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From: *William Campbell via Sbuboard <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
>>>> *Sent: *Monday, September 10, 2018 2:54 PM
>>>> *To: *Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
>>>> *Cc: *William Campbell <jwccsllc at me.com>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [SBU Board] Vasa schdule--quick vote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I prefer 2 session unless the third session were choice pairs allowing
>>>> people to select 2 of the three sessions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I prefer Fast Pairs to BAM, but probably wouldn't play either as I'm
>>>> not up for three sessions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 10, 2018, at 1:29 PM, Ann Romeo <annromeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) I vote yes on a third session
>>>>
>>>> 2) I vote no on BAM and yes on Fast Pairs as third session
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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 Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 4:27 PM, JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry...let me be more explicit:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) I vote no on a third session.
>>>>
>>>> 2) I vote no on BAM and FP for the third session, if it were to be run.
>>>> (If we run a third session, I like Eric's choice pairs idea, although we
>>>> can only run that for the open.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> JC Chupack
>>>>
>>>> Seattle ACBL Unit 446 <http://bridgeinseattle.org/> Secretary,
>>>> Electronic Contact, & Publicity Chair
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:25 PM, JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1) I vote no on a third session.
>>>>
>>>> 2) If we run a third session, I like Eric's choice pairs idea, although
>>>> we can only run that for the open.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> JC Chupack
>>>>
>>>> Seattle ACBL Unit 446 <http://bridgeinseattle.org/> Secretary,
>>>> Electronic Contact, & Publicity Chair
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Eric Sieg <easieg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1) I vote yes on a 3rd session, at least this year. Then re-evaluate as
>>>> to whether we want to have a 3rd session and whether we want to stick with
>>>> Morning/Afternoon on Friday of the Sweetheart in the PM.
>>>> 2) My primary thought is not a BAM.
>>>>
>>>> One possibility is a fast pairs that is run correctly. Alternatively,
>>>> we could run Friday as a choice pairs where people pick 2 sessions to play.
>>>> That way daytime people can play Morning/afternoon and working people could
>>>> play afternoon/evening. I'm fine with either of these solutions and am not
>>>> sure if choice pairs was brought up as an option during the meeting.
>>>>
>>>> For choice pairs, see section I at:
>>>> https://www.acbl.org/about-acbl/administration/acbl-handbook/ii-kinds-of-event/
>>>>
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ann Romeo wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Reviewing the comments of the people who have weighed in (I believe we
>>>> have not heard from Patti, Mike or Eric at this point), it seems that the
>>>> majority are leaning toward not having a third session at Vasa  at our
>>>> Sweetheart sectional.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would like to get a yea or nay from each of you, on the following:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First, *should we have a third session at Vasa on Friday at our
>>>> February sectional?  *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Second, *if yes, should we have Fast Pairs?*
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> *Should we have single session BAM?*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Finally, if we do not have a single session BAM, I will propose at our
>>>> next meeting that we hold a single session BAM on the second session of the
>>>> Friday of our KO tournament in May.
>>>>
>>>> ( we don't have to vote on that right now).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for participating.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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 listSbuboard at mailman.celestial.comhttp://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
>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180910/5d5b68ae/attachment-0001.html>