[mycroft]

I try to turn off "travellers" in club games run by Bridgemates. I find people "would like to know" how they've been doing with traveller information, but after playing a couple of weeks without it, they find what they really prefer is the 15 minutes saved when everybody isn't trying to figure out which nutcase went for -930 on board 6.

I've actually always thought that knowing what happened previously on a traveller was not a beneficial service to be lost, but a harmful side-effect that was tolerated - and with wireless scoring, it no longer need be.

Tournaments have "always" (I mean, at least since the "so recent we can't remember all the changes" change to the Alert Chart that added NT Announcements; 1990) used pickup slips.

I could be wrong about my opinions...

[barmar]

Most of the ACBL club games I've played in used travelers (sometimes the director switches to pickup slips for the last 1-2 rounds, so he can start entering scores before the game finishes), and in those clubs that have switched to electronic scoring they've kept the previous score display for consistency. In my experience, glancing at the previous scores adds at most 15 seconds to most boards; maybe one or two boards a session will prompt 30-60 minutes of discussion about the "nutcase". So the total delay added to the game is probably about 5 minutes. If this is something that enhances their enjoyment of the game, is that really so bad?

Like mycroft, I've never seen travelers used at a tournament, and they never enable this feature on the electronic scorers.

[blackshoe]

That's pretty much it, David, although clubs used to use travellers and until the advent of Bridgepads some around here still did occasionally, particularly with a playing director.

[pran]

 bluejak, on 2012-July-30, 16:04, said:

History tends to come into this. Traditionally, all EBU clubs and events had travelers, so not to allow other scores to be seen means the customers have lost a service.
[...]

And only because of history you find it unacceptable to remove this "service" which many players consider unfair (although interesting) as it gives different quality of information to different players?

Setting Bridgemate to hide this "service" puts all competitors on equal terms.

(And "nosing" all such extra information takes time that can better be used on playing bridge.)

[mjj29]

 pran, on 2012-July-30, 23:55, said:

And only because of history you find it unacceptable to remove this "service" which many players consider unfair (although interesting) as it gives different quality of information to different players?

Setting Bridgemate to hide this "service" puts all competitors on equal terms.

(And "nosing" all such extra information takes time that can better be used on playing bridge.)

Many players may consider it unfair and for many reasons I would rather travellers were not shown. However, since (at the request of EBU members) the EBU Tournament Committee told the TDs they should start turning it on for EBU tournaments after we had been leaving them off, it's clear that many of the players _do_ want to have travellers on. At least in the EBU it seems to be what the customers want.

[StevenG]

 mjj29, on 2012-July-31, 01:58, said:

Many players may consider it unfair and for many reasons I would rather travellers were not shown. However, since (at the request of EBU members) the EBU Tournament Committee told the TDs they should start turning it on for EBU tournaments after we had been leaving them off, it's clear that many of the players _do_ want to have travellers on. At least in the EBU it seems to be what the customers want.

I've played with BridgeMates without travellers and, quite frankly, I loathe it. If you can't see roughly how you're doing, there's no way to generate any adrenalin, and the session just becomes a treadmill.

If they were turned off at a club, I wouldn't go to that club.

[FrancesHinden]

 pran, on 2012-July-30, 23:55, said:

And only because of history you find it unacceptable to remove this "service" which many players consider unfair (although interesting) as it gives different quality of information to different players?

Setting Bridgemate to hide this "service" puts all competitors on equal terms.

(And "nosing" all such extra information takes time that can better be used on playing bridge.)

As it happens I would much prefer that the 'travellers' were not provided; however it is clear that the overall preference is for this to be turned on with Bridgemates even though it (i) slows the game down and (ii) sometimes leads to boards becoming unplayable.

However, all the players get the same information, and they are all on equal terms either way. How can you say the different players get a different quality of information?

[pran]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-July-31, 03:19, said:

As it happens I would much prefer that the 'travellers' were not provided; however it is clear that the overall preference is for this to be turned on with Bridgemates even though it (i) slows the game down and (ii) sometimes leads to boards becoming unplayable.

However, all the players get the same information, and they are all on equal terms either way. How can you say the different players get a different quality of information?

Because the amount of information you get depends on how many times the board has been played before you played it.

[pran]

 StevenG, on 2012-July-31, 02:43, said:

I've played with BridgeMates without travellers and, quite frankly, I loathe it. If you can't see roughly how you're doing, there's no way to generate any adrenalin, and the session just becomes a treadmill.

If they were turned off at a club, I wouldn't go to that club.

Maybe I am biased:

For decades the preferred schedule in Norway has been barometer. We get the whole (progressive) status after each round because all tables play the same boards during the same round.

That was the case even before computer aided scoring became available and we used pick-up slips until Bridgemates were introduced. So we have no "problem" with history, and I have never heard any complaint from players wanting to see the information we do not show on the Bridgemate. (Maybe they are unaware of the possibility?)

[pran]

 mjj29, on 2012-July-31, 01:58, said:

Many players may consider it unfair and for many reasons I would rather travellers were not shown. However, since (at the request of EBU members) the EBU Tournament Committee told the TDs they should start turning it on for EBU tournaments after we had been leaving them off, it's clear that many of the players _do_ want to have travellers on. At least in the EBU it seems to be what the customers want.

I am astonished on learning (if it really is true) that EBU has instructed (rather than recommended) their TDs like this?

(And I do indeed wonder if players would maintain their opinion to have travellers on if told the arguments pro and con?)

[gordontd]

 pran, on 2012-July-31, 03:55, said:

I am astonished on learning (if it really is true) that EBU has instructed (rather than recommended) their TDs like this?

What's surprising about the Tournament Committee deciding the conditions of the tournaments?

[pran]

 gordontd, on 2012-July-31, 03:59, said:

What's surprising about the Tournament Committee deciding the conditions of the tournaments?

If their decision applies only to EBU events, nothing.

I understood the post that it applied to all events (using Bridgemate) within EBU?

[pran]

Back in 2007 I participated in the "European Company sport games" Bridge competition in Denmark and discovered during the first session that the traveller option was turned on. Like in Norway barometer schedule is (as far as I know) the preferred schedule in Denmark, but for these Eurofestivals Howell or Mitchell schedules with qualifications and finals seems to be the standard.

I approached the TD in private and told him my reasons for always disabling the traveller option with my own events. Apparently as a result of this he decided to disable the option for the remaining sessions, and to my knowledge he had no complaint on this from any player.

[gordontd]

 pran, on 2012-July-31, 04:02, said:

If their decision applies only to EBU events, nothing.

I understood the post that it applied to all events (using Bridgemate) within EBU?

Then you misunderstood. In general the EBU takes a very hands-off approach to how clubs run their games.

[pran]

 gordontd, on 2012-July-31, 04:42, said:

Then you misunderstood. In general the EBU takes a very hands-off approach to how clubs run their games.

Good,
and I apologize for my misunderstanding.

[FrancesHinden]

 pran, on 2012-July-31, 03:44, said:

Because the amount of information you get depends on how many times the board has been played before you played it.

Everybody gets the same amount of information (plus/minus possibly one result depending where you are in the movement relative to the ghost pair).
In a normal pairs event with one section you will see two boards with no other results, two boards with one other result etc
It is completely fair to everyone.

It's true that different players will see a different number of results on one particular board, but everyone gets the same amount of information in total in the course of the event.

[FrancesHinden]

 pran, on 2012-July-31, 03:55, said:

I am astonished on learning (if it really is true) that EBU has instructed (rather than recommended) their TDs like this?

(And I do indeed wonder if players would maintain their opinion to have travellers on if told the arguments pro and con?)

Yes, they do. The same discussion was had at my local club and as a result the travellers are turned on.
I am well aware I am in a minority wanting them turned off. It is absolutely clear that most people want them on, just as they want the % score on as well.
They want the running scores showing on the TV screen as well.

[gnasher]

 pran, on 2012-July-31, 04:24, said:

Back in 2007 I participated in the "European Company sport games" Bridge competition in Denmark and discovered during the first session that the traveller option was turned on. Like in Norway barometer schedule is (as far as I know) the preferred schedule in Denmark, but for these Eurofestivals Howell or Mitchell schedules with qualifications and finals seems to be the standard.

I approached the TD in private and told him my reasons for always disabling the traveller option with my own events. Apparently as a result of this he decided to disable the option for the remaining sessions, and to my knowledge he had no complaint on this from any player.

Maybe you could have a word with the authorities in the WBF and the EBL? Their Bridgemates are always set to show the percentages as soon as you enter the score.

I can understand the arguments for having the Bridgemates set like this in low-level events like club games. I even understand, without agreeing with, the EBU's reasons for doing the same in its events. It seems ridiculous, however, to do this in a World or European pairs event, where the emphasis should be on testing bridge skill.

[Vampyr]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-July-31, 08:32, said:

Everybody gets the same amount of information (plus/minus possibly one result depending where you are in the movement relative to the ghost pair).
In a normal pairs event with one section you will see two boards with no other results, two boards with one other result etc
It is completely fair to everyone.

It's true that different players will see a different number of results on one particular board, but everyone gets the same amount of information in total in the course of the event.

I think what Sven is referring to here is the fact that the value of information on some boards is different from the value of information on others. If, on a late board, you learn that you earned a top or bottom, this fact may be useful in informing your actions on the rest of the boards. If the later boards you see are about average for you, you will in a sense have lower-quality information.

[pran]

 Vampyr, on 2012-July-31, 15:00, said:

I think what Sven is referring to here is the fact that the value of information on some boards is different from the value of information on others. If, on a late board, you learn that you earned a top or bottom, this fact may be useful in informing your actions on the rest of the boards. If the later boards you see are about average for you, you will in a sense have lower-quality information.

Exactly.

Now please consider the reasons why in competitions for teams of four no result on any board shall be made available to any pair or team (even when the board has been completed in both rooms) until all boards in the round have been completed?

I have still to meet anybody who thinks that results on completed boards should be disclosed to teams of four competitors during a round, so how come so many seem to consider it OK that intermediate results are disclosed to pairs during the round in competitons for pairs?