[gordontd]

661_Pete, on 2018-December-15, 03:19, said:

That's a good point. I shall ask our club chairman about that - but I guess the move would be unpopular. It's part of human nature: players like to know "how well did we do?" just after a hand.

With paper travellers this problem would be far less likely to occur, seeing as the traveller would be tucked in a pocket in the board, and less likely to get mixed up. But although there are still some EBU affiliated clubs using paper (what are EBU rules about this?), most use Bridgemates these days.

Clubs are certainly not required to use electronic scoring, if that is what you are asking.

[sanst]

As the most famous Dutch football player of all time said: “Every disadvantage has an advantage”. That goes for Bridgemates as well. These are a great help for scoring, given a quick and correct result. Who remembers the days of paper travellers, with al the work involved? Using the Neuberg formula when necessary. It took at least half an hour to give a preliminary result and then you had to check and recalculate everything again later and could publish a definite result only days later.
But Bridgemates offer many opportunities for showing results and once the club members discover this, they want the full monty: percentages and all scores on a board. When checking the input many Easts just push the button and blare out the percentage, even when the board hasn’t been played before. This worse the players, the more interested they are, I’m afraid. An attempt at our club not to show the percentage, since this is only relevant in the last round, met massive opposition and had to be abandoned. To try not to show the scores and percentages, no matter how sensible that is, would probably lead to a revolt like that of the yellow vests in France

[nige1]

Anyway, re: post title: 661_Pete was right to call the TD

[pescetom]

661_Pete, on 2018-December-15, 03:19, said:

That's a good point. I shall ask our club chairman about that - but I guess the move would be unpopular. It's part of human nature: players like to know "how well did we do?" just after a hand.

Some also argue that knowing whether you are currently winning or losing compared to the rest of the field is an inherent right when competing in a sporting event. With electronic scoring it would be possible to give real-time positions without revealing the other contracts played on each hand, which would eliminate that argument but without satisfying end of hand curiosity. Another option.

[blackshoe]

pescetom, on 2018-December-15, 15:43, said:

Some also argue that knowing whether you are currently winning or losing compared to the rest of the field is an inherent right when competing in a sporting event. With electronic scoring it would be possible to give real-time positions without revealing the other contracts played on each hand, which would eliminate that argument but without satisfying end of hand curiosity. Another option.

I wonder what those folks think is the basis of this "inherent right".

[gordontd]

blackshoe, on 2018-December-15, 22:47, said:

I wonder what those folks think is the basis of this "inherent right".

In which other games are you expected to make decisions without knowing your current position? I don't say there are no others, just that none come immediately to my mind.

[sanst]

pescetom, on 2018-December-15, 15:43, said:

Some also argue that knowing whether you are currently winning or losing compared to the rest of the field is an inherent right when competing in a sporting event. With electronic scoring it would be possible to give real-time positions without revealing the other contracts played on each hand, which would eliminate that argument but without satisfying end of hand curiosity. Another option.

But the Bridgemate doesn’t show that, just the scores on the board played. You need the app to see the actual rankings, if this service is provided by the organiser. In our club we have decided not to activate this, because there are quite a few - mainly elderly - players who don’t have a smartphone or don’t know how to use it, and also we’re afraid that the others would look almost permanently at the screen like some youngsters.

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2018-December-14, 10:55, said:

Here they are usually configured so that you must first confirm the results (with the board number visualised), which in turn means that the entered lead was in the correct hand (which will be untrue for 75% of wrong boards played). So both sides would have to be inattentive as well as unlucky to be able to see the results of an unplayed hand.

We use BridgeTab (a scoring application for Android tablets) and it apparently only notifies the director, not the table, when it's an impossible lead (I suspect that's a configuration option, but haven't bugged the director to change it). We also have several Norths who routinely click "Skip" because they can't be bothered to remember what the opening lead was.

The one time I recall us seeing the wrong board results was because we'd played the board out of order, and didn't realize that the board number was not the expected one until after confirming it and noticing that the other results made no sense.

[blackshoe]

gordontd, on 2018-December-16, 02:34, said:

In which other games are you expected to make decisions without knowing your current position? I don't say there are no others, just that none come immediately to my mind.

My first guess would be any wargame that includes "fog of war".

[pescetom]

gordontd, on 2018-December-16, 02:34, said:

In which other games are you expected to make decisions without knowing your current position? I don't say there are no others, just that none come immediately to my mind.

blackshoe, on 2018-December-16, 13:46, said:

My first guess would be any wargame that includes "fog of war".

If you can't do better than that then it isn't much of an argument
I've done many established sports, and when trying to win I have always known which of my real competitors is ahead at the moment. In athletics it is difficult to compare heats, in cycling you might occasionally miss somebody, but as a rule you know.

sanst, on 2018-December-16, 02:51, said:

But the Bridgemate doesn’t show that, just the scores on the board played. You need the app to see the actual rankings, if this service is provided by the organiser.

I guess that again it is a question of configuration. Here, after opponents confirm the score, the bridgemate allows you to check the result and this shows both the score and the temporary percentage on that board (43% or whatever). It doesn't show the ranking in the competition, but some organisers project that on a screen too.

barmar, on 2018-December-16, 12:09, said:

We use BridgeTab (a scoring application for Android tablets) and it apparently only notifies the director, not the table, when it's an impossible lead (I suspect that's a configuration option, but haven't bugged the director to change it). We also have several Norths who routinely click "Skip" because they can't be bothered to remember what the opening lead was.

The one time I recall us seeing the wrong board results was because we'd played the board out of order, and didn't realize that the board number was not the expected one until after confirming it and noticing that the other results made no sense.

As configured here, the Bridgemate refuses an impossible lead, which I think makes sense. Of course it's only a 75% check, but much better than none.

[pran]

pescetom, on 2018-December-16, 14:38, said:

As configured here, the Bridgemate refuses an impossible lead, which I think makes sense. Of course it's only a 75% check, but much better than none.

That is a security issue.

It has already been shown in this forum how it is possible with that feature to locate whether declarer's LHO holds a particular card (by first falsely typing that card as the lead card and then correct this registration).

Bridgemate should never be configured in a way so that information about cards can be displayed before it is legally available to the contestants at the table.

[PeterAlan]

pran, on 2018-December-16, 15:33, said:

That is a security issue.

It has already been shown in this forum how it is possible with that feature to locate whether declarer's LHO holds a particular card (by first falsely typing that card as the lead card and then correct this registration).

Bridgemate should never be configured in a way so that information about cards can be displayed before it is legally available to the contestants at the table.

Bridgemates do not report on the lead card check when the card is entered; they do so when the result is entered afterwards. It would be easy to spot an operator going that far before the hand is played.

sanst, on 2018-December-16, 02:51, said:

pescetom, on 2018-December-15, 15:43, said:

Some also argue that knowing whether you are currently winning or losing compared to the rest of the field is an inherent right when competing in a sporting event. With electronic scoring it would be possible to give real-time positions without revealing the other contracts played on each hand, which would eliminate that argument but without satisfying end of hand curiosity. Another option.

But the Bridgemate doesn’t show that, just the scores on the board played. You need the app to see the actual rankings, if this service is provided by the organiser. In our club we have decided not to activate this, because there are quite a few - mainly elderly - players who don’t have a smartphone or don’t know how to use it, and also we’re afraid that the others would look almost permanently at the screen like some youngsters.

With the more recent software and firmware, Bridgemate II units can be configured to offer to show the current rankings of the pairs (via one of the variable function buttons), whether or not they are configured to show the board results.

[blackshoe]

Here, we get no opportunity to enter the lead. Matchpoint scores are not available until after the last round is entered. If we want to know how we're doing during the game, we have to figure it out ourselves.

[pran]

PeterAlan, on 2018-December-16, 17:33, said:

Bridgemates do not report on the lead card check when the card is entered; they do so when the result is entered afterwards. It would be easy to spot an operator going that far before the hand is played.

Then what is the point of informing the players at the table of a lead card error when it is too late to do anything about it?

I use the lead card as one of the factors for the Director when investigating a claim on a scoring error

[jhenrikj]

pran, on 2018-December-17, 01:36, said:

Then what is the point of informing the players at the table of a lead card error when it is too late to do anything about it?

I use the lead card as one of the factors for the Director when investigating a claim on a scoring error

The Bridgemate reports if the card entered is impossible when E/W confirmes the score, if it's not a possible lead you will have to go back and change it. If it was a possible lead the score is accepted and if you try to find a particular card you will have a very hard time explaining to the opponents and TD why you did enter the final result before the board was played.

So that situation is a non existing problem, what is a very existing problem is that north is able to check what the lead was when declaring if he does not remember., and that might be harder for the opponents to spot.

[pran]

jhenrikj, on 2018-December-17, 01:44, said:

The Bridgemate reports if the card entered is impossible when E/W confirmes the score, if it's not a possible lead you will have to go back and change it.

And what is gained by that procedure?

Say that nobody remembers the opening lead after 13 tricks have been played and LHO has already shuffled his cards?

A long time wasted trying to figure out the correct lead.

I do enforce lead card registration in my events, but I don't bother with careless registrations unless there is a request to have a registered result changed.
In such cases I usually grant the request right away if it is corroborated by (among other facts) the lead card registrations.
However, if there is a discrepancy here I enforce a much stricter procedure involving a full hearing with both sides.

[PeterAlan]

pran, on 2018-December-17, 02:31, said:

And what is gained by that procedure?

Say that nobody remembers the opening lead after 13 tricks have been played and LHO has already shuffled his cards?

A long time wasted trying to figure out the correct lead.

I do enforce lead card registration in my events, but I don't bother with careless registrations unless there is a request to have a registered result changed.
In such cases I usually grant the request right away if it is corroborated by (among other facts) the lead card registrations.
However, if there is a discrepancy here I enforce a much stricter procedure involving a full hearing with both sides.

Normal practice is to enter the contract and opening lead at the start of the hand. When you get to the end of play, you enter the result, and if the lead is not validated the Bridgemate says so.

If nevertheless you don't enter the lead at the start, someone may (1) have remembered it, (2) have written it on their scorecard or (3) despite what you say, even look at what they played before they shuffle their cards. And the Bridgemate operators quickly learn what's required.

What's gained is an accurate opening lead (with all the advantages you have already mentioned), instead of it routinely being ♣2. The only glitch is in cases of an accepted opening lead out of turn, and there are ways for the TD to deal with that at the time.

[jhenrikj]

pran, on 2018-December-17, 02:31, said:

And what is gained by that procedure?

Say that nobody remembers the opening lead after 13 tricks have been played and LHO has already shuffled his cards?

A long time wasted trying to figure out the correct lead.

I do enforce lead card registration in my events, but I don't bother with careless registrations unless there is a request to have a registered result changed.
In such cases I usually grant the request right away if it is corroborated by (among other facts) the lead card registrations.
However, if there is a discrepancy here I enforce a much stricter procedure involving a full hearing with both sides.

Of course you do not wait until the end of the hand to enter the lead, you enter it when the card is led, but the bridgemate does not say anything until the score is confirmed.

And if you don't remember, pick any of the 13 cards from that hand, it not worse than players always entering 2 of diamonds.

[pran]

I am fully aware of the Bridgemate routinies and I consider security weakness to exist with any feature that could expose information not legally available to the players at the table.

Therefore I do not activate such features.

I do request lead card registrations (for the benefit of later studies of the boards), but I do not let any information like "Lead card error" be given to the table as this will not IMHO serve any real and legal purpose.

[jhenrikj]

pran, on 2018-December-17, 04:14, said:

I am fully aware of the Bridgemate routinies and I consider security weakness to exist with any feature that could expose information not legally available to the players at the table.

Therefore I do not activate such features.

I do request lead card registrations (for the benefit of later studies of the boards), but I do not let any information like "Lead card error" be given to the table as this will not IMHO serve any real and legal purpose.

Then you must disable the lead card registration because now you "allow" north to have a written reminder of what the lead card was.