[TimG]

Into the round of 8 in the competition for USA 1 and still the boards are not the same in all matches. Anyone have any insight into this decision? Thoughts pro and con?

[inquiry]

No insight, but is make the game more secure I guess.

I prefer if they were duplicated, but it isn't our decision. Some might like wider variety of hands in the same time period, more neat things to find and discuss. So from a viewer standpoint, the variety might be better.

[Phil]

I noticed this too. The game is a lot more secure, and I don't find there is much of a loss of interest in kibitzing.

[Jlall]

Safety should come before the kibitzers wishes.

I prefer as a kibitzer that they play different boards fwiw but I know that's a minority view.

[matmat]

so long as they play the same boards at both tables in a single match, it's OK with me.

[mtvesuvius]

As a commentator I have gotten a lot of questions about this, and I know most people would like to have the same boards at each table, but I also think that security should come before the kibitzer's wishes.

[Gerben42]

I think the USA is the only country with this policy at the moment.

[TimG]

inquiry, on Jun 9 2009, 10:16 AM, said:

No insight, but is make the game more secure I guess.

You mean more secure as in less chance of hearing/seeing a bit of useful information from an adjacent table?

I'm also a bit surprised by the frequency of bathroom and smoking breaks during a segment. Each segment is 2h 15m, that doesn't seem like an excessive time to be asked to stay at the table. And, wouldn't it improve security if the players actually did stay at the tables?

[qwery_hi]

TimG, on Jun 9 2009, 10:57 AM, said:

inquiry, on Jun 9 2009, 10:16 AM, said:

No insight, but is make the game more secure I guess.

You mean more secure as in less chance of hearing/seeing a bit of useful information from an adjacent table?

I'm also a bit surprised by the frequency of bathroom and smoking breaks during a segment. Each segment is 2h 15m, that doesn't seem like an excessive time to be asked to stay at the table. And, wouldn't it improve security if the players actually did stay at the tables?

As long as the other three players at the table are ok with any breaks (for bathroom or smoking or to stretch the legs), why would anyone have a problem?

[Aberlour10]

inquiry, on Jun 9 2009, 10:16 AM, said:

Some might like wider variety of hands in the same time period, more neat things to find and discuss.

Its exactly my point of view.

There were a lot of flat boards, with less interesting hands >>(seeing all 52 cards), the comment "claim" was all what there were to say. Jumping between these 6 tables I found anytime interesting hands for me.

Robert

[OleBerg]

Apart from, at least some of, the kibitzers, it might be, that the players would prefer that the same boards were played at all tables.

One reason for that could be fairness. Some distributions are more prone to cause swings than others. Playing the same boards, all teams would have the same number of "wild boards". I know full well, that it is not as simple as that, but it is a step in the right direction.
(Edit: Wasn't aware it was knockout. In such cases this wont matter.)

Another reason could be the chance to learn. When you, as a player, has a difficult decision, some would find it nice to see, how other players of the same strength have dealt with the problem.

[Hanoi5]

Let me see if I understand this right:

There's a team tournament and different matches (from the same tournament) are playing different sets of boards.

If this is the case I think it is VERY wrong. We used to do this in my country but it led to so many complains and it was really unfair. What if we deal dull hands and win in only one board while the others are having swings all around? How about going into the next phase? Some teams will surely be more tired than others (they had more difficult decisions to take) and some others will be fresher (they're hands were 'easy').

Safety should be achieved in some other way, like having people watching in the bathroom or making sure there's no noise (-1 VP or X number of imp's for those who discuss the hand at the table).

[jdonn]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2009, 05:04 PM, said:

What if we deal dull hands and win in only one board while the others are having swings all around?

Why is that any less fair for you than if you deal dull hands and win in only one board while the exact same thing happens all around? The only thing impacting the fairness of your match are the boards in your match, you should have no reason to care what everyone else is playing.

Quote

How about going into the next phase? Some teams will surely be more tired than others (they had more difficult decisions to take) and some others will be fresher (they're hands were 'easy').

Seriously? When was the last 64 board match you played where you ended and said "Gosh those were boring and easy, I'm so fresh I expect to play really well tomorrow!"

I mean seriously, this whole thing is much ado about nothing at all. Safety is the most important concern and this is a very good way to achieve it. Your suggestions, that you need people on bathroom duty and you need to implement more penalties, are so much worse.

[Hanoi5]

Quote

Your suggestions, that you need people on bathroom duty and you need to implement more penalties, are so much worse.

So it is better to give in to the players' bad behaviour than making them follow rules? Amazing. It's a good thing people thinking like that are not in congress...

[NickRW]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2009, 10:30 PM, said:

Quote

Your suggestions, that you need people on bathroom duty and you need to implement more penalties, are so much worse.

So it is better to give in to the players' bad behaviour than making them follow rules? Amazing. It's a good thing people thinking like that are not in congress...

I don't think that is the concern really. It depends on the physical playing environment. In the early rounds of a knockout, or a large round robin, there may very well not be separate rooms for each table. Indeed everyone may be in quite a large hall with relatively little space between the tables. Nor is it likely that there will be sufficient officials that every time someone needs to take a pee that a minder can be sent along. Under those circumstances surely it is better not to have the possible security concern in the first place.

[jdonn]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2009, 05:30 PM, said:

Quote

Your suggestions, that you need people on bathroom duty and you need to implement more penalties, are so much worse.

So it is better to give in to the players' bad behaviour than making them follow rules? Amazing. It's a good thing people thinking like that are not in congress...

Yes that's exactly what I said. Thank you for your fair and accurate quote so that we could have a reasonable discussion.

[xcurt]

jdonn, on Jun 9 2009, 06:25 PM, said:

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2009, 05:30 PM, said:

Quote

Your suggestions, that you need people on bathroom duty and you need to implement more penalties, are so much worse.

So it is better to give in to the players' bad behaviour than making them follow rules? Amazing. It's a good thing people thinking like that are not in congress...

Yes that's exactly what I said. Thank you for your fair and accurate quote so that we could have a reasonable discussion.

Hanoi, let's say you were playing in an event like this and you thought maybe one pair were using the break for nefarious purposes. But you have the "right" to insist they stay at the table. Let's say you enforce that right against only the one pair you suspect. Now you have de facto accused them of c******g. If you enforce the right against all pairs, everyone will wonder why you are being so difficult.

[3for3]

A couple of notes about this issue.

First, regarding the bathroom breaks, each table is in its own hotel room. So the players never leave that room, even if they go to the bathroom.

As for another reason to play different boards, there is no issue with a match that runs a little late (or early!), for them to start at different times.

During the RR, when the swinginess of boards was potentially meaningful, we did use the same boards across the field.

Who cares if, in a knockout, other players played different boards?

Danny

[mike777]

"First, regarding the bathroom breaks, each table is in its own hotel room. So the players never leave that room, even if they go to the bathroom."

That is interesting, was that true for the RR as well as Ko's?

[barmar]

3for3, on Jun 9 2009, 07:57 PM, said:

Who cares if, in a knockout, other players played different boards?

It makes tournament reports more interesting. When there's a tricky hand it's nice to hear how all the different experts played it.

In a recent international tournament, the same boards were played in the final of the open teams, women's teams, and senior teams. The tournament report in the Bridge World was mainly about the open teams, but on a handful of boards he compared how they bid and/or played with how the board was played in the other events.