[SBU Board] Update on Virtual KO and Zoom question

[Scott Chupack]

My thought process behind undos,

When people create the team matches, they will have to decide whether to
activate the undo function or not. All ACBL and BBO tournaments (with the
exception of free private tournaments like the Mercercrest game) have the
feature turned off. I think undos are fine for casual or friendly games,
but in competitive situations they are problematic.
- When someone requests an undo, there is pretty much no way to turn down
the request without looking like an ass
- Even if it's intention is only for misclicks, people will also use it
when they forgot their system or miscounted their hand or didn't think
through their play.
- It's pretty much impossible to do an undo without giving away UI to your
partner. Just the request of an undo, even if it's not granted, gives UI.
- We are an ACBL entity, and even if this event is not ACBL sanctioned, we
would like these events to be in the future and I don't see a good argument
for using different rules than we would if we were sanctioned.

Misclicks suck, but everyone plays under the same rules and they are used
to these rules from the virtual club events. Similarly to using convention
cards (which it something else that the ACBL expects and the Mercercrest
game doesn't), I think we should default to ACBL online precedent (unless a
consensus feel otherwise or that we should let the DIC decide).

(As for the situation that happened at our table last week when a pass was
alerted as 15-17, I think a director could have solved the problem
creatively, even if that director chose not to do so. Jenni is an
experienced BBO director, and she has a variety of tools available to her.)

-----

FYI, now up to 3 teams in the 0-2500 bracket, with 10 teams in open.



On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 4:54 PM Raymond Miller <raysmiller at gmail.com> wrote:

> Scott, one issue.  I heard that the COC state that no undos will be
> allowed.  I am pretty strongly opposed to this.  This is not an acbl
> matchpoint event so we have our choice.  It is so easy to push the wrong
> thing like the guy playing against me the other day who announced his pass
> as 15-17.  Clearly he meant to bid 1nt, and he would have allowed an undo,
> but with no undos that's it.  He's stuck.  Do we really need to have this
> feature in place?
>
> Ray
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 4:40 PM Karen Hudesman via Sbuboard <
> sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Scott for all your work On this.. I defer to whatever the group
>> decides..
>> Karen
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 18, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Susan Cothern <4susancothern at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hi Scott:  Thanks for all your efforts on getting this KO coordinated.  I
>> will defer to whatever you think is best.
>>
>> Susan
>>
>> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 2:10 PM Scott Chupack <scottchupack at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> To date, we have 12 teams signed up currently. 10 teams are in Open and
>>> 2 teams are in the 0-2500 bracket. I know of at least 3 pairs that have
>>> shown interest that haven't signed up yet. 3 of the 12 teams signed up this
>>> morning. At this point, I would expect 12-18 teams in Open and 2-6 teams in
>>> 0-2500.
>>>
>>> Update on Zoom teleconferencing for the event:
>>>
>>> First of all, 30 minutes before the match, we will have a Zoom lobby set
>>> up to provide walkthroughs if people are confused about setting up tables
>>> or just want to mingle.
>>>
>>> Aaron Mohrman, who has been the person coordinating Zoom conferencing
>>> for the Mercercrest game has volunteered to offer to set tables up in Zoom
>>> for the KO (he is planning to play in the event). I spoke to him on
>>> Saturday in talking through the issues. There are several problems with
>>> implementing this, however
>>>
>>> 1) If we were to implement, we would as people at check-in if they would
>>> ant to opt-in to Zoom.
>>>
>>> 2) We have a 30 minute turnaround time between getting the line-ups and
>>> getting all the people to set up the tables. This adds another layer of
>>> complexity.
>>>
>>> 3) There may be people that want to do Zoom, but haven't installed Zoom
>>> and/or played in the Mercercrest game. That leaves a lot of tech issues.
>>>
>>> 4) If we do round-robin matches, we need to put people in different
>>> rooms a total of 3 times. If we do halftimes and people want to switch
>>> players, then they would have to be reseated.
>>>
>>> 5) FWIW, Jenni have left the Zoom decisions to me, but doesn't want to
>>> be part of it.
>>>
>>> ------
>>>
>>> What I am leaning towards is the following options
>>>
>>> 1) No Zoom
>>>
>>> 2) If matches both want to play on Zoom, they need to set it up
>>> themselves.
>>>
>>> 3)   If matches both want to play on Zoom, they need to set it up
>>> themselves or contact Aaron and coordinate directly, but not guaranteed
>>>
>>> 4)  We try to allow all people who both want to play on Zoom that Aaron
>>> will try to set it up, but only starting with Round 2
>>>
>>>  5)  We try to allow all people who both want to play on Zoom that Aaron
>>> will try to set it up.
>>>
>>> I'm leaning towards options 2, 3, or 4 but would like any feedback you
>>> have.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/private/sbuboard/attachments/20200518/f545f34c/attachment.html>