[Cascade]

On the spur of the moment I directed a free tournament today.

I direct a teaching tournament every week and last year did up to three or four of these tournaments every week. Almost every time there is up to two or three players who vanish for whatever reason in the course of the tournament. These tournaments are also free.

In my free tournament I lost nearly 25% of the players - at least 15 players out of 64 who started the tournament did not finish. There may have been more if any vanished in the first board I cannot remember. The numbers come from the traveller for board one compared with the list of final results.

At least two players claimed part way through that they had other commitments - one said the bus was coming to take him to work.

Some complained that the tournament was too slow - although I never once extended the round. There were six rounds of two boards at 8 minutes per board. Some of the rounds finished early so that the whole tournament was finished inside 1.5 hrs.

At times when called to the table the player who called me would not answer my questions.

At the end of the tournament not one player thanked me.

Are these experiences normal for free tournaments?

What do other directors who direct free tournaments find?

[golfacer]

Are these experiences normal? From my BBO directing experiences...

Quote

Some complained that the tournament was too slow - although I never once extended the round. There were six rounds of two boards at 8 minutes per board.

It is not uncommon for people to complain that a tournament is slow. Some players choose not to see the fact that not everyone plays quickly, or that many things can happen during a round that take time. I have had one player leave because I did not accept his demand to reduce the time to 14 minutes/2 boards, although the tournament description indicated that it would be 16 minutes/2 boards. It is a tournament; not a race.

Possible solution: None. Some people will complain about anything.

Quote

I lost nearly 25% of the players - at least 15 players out of 64 who started the tournament did not finish.

It is relatively uncommon to lose 25% of your players in 90 minutes when directing at that time of the day, but I have seen it happen.

Possible solutions:

1. Reduce the maximum disconnect percentage at which a player gets a short ban from playing in tournaments. I think it is currently 35% in a week? I would suggest 20% over 2-4 weeks (so that one bad day from an ISP does not get people in trouble).

2. Display a tournament finished percentage as part of everyone's profile. This option would also help players find a more committed partner at the partnership desk. It would also encourage many players to think twice about leaving.

3. Add a director option to allow only players with an x% unfinished rate or less.

Quote

At least two players claimed part way through that they had other commitments - one said the bus was coming to take him to work.

Sadly, it is not unusual for players to give an excuse to leave. Usually, their excuses are a bit more believable than that...

Quote

At times when called to the table the player who called me would not answer my questions.

That is not uncommon, either. Some may be too lazy to answer. Other cases are a result of players who can not understand the language in which the tournament is being conducted.

Quote

At the end of the tournament not one player thanked me.

Pretty unusual, I think. The directors who appear to get thanked the most are the ones who are a bit obnoxious in tournament chat and who have tournament chat open to the players, I would guess because the more talkative players are encouraged to speak. It is not a net gain for those directors, because excessive tournament chat also tends to be annoying to many people. I think most people really do appreciate a well-run tournament, although they may not thank the director.

[nickf]

I direct once a week for a private club.

Every week, there is at least someone who part way through asks to be excused. I have a simple philosophy:

I tell them that once they sign up for a 12 bd tournament, they have made a committment to play 12 boards, no less. I tell them that I refuse to sub them. About 3/4 of these people seem to accept this approach. When the remainder continue to complain, I re-iterate the rules and priviledge of being of member of the said club. That usually shuts them up.

nickf
sydney

[csdenmark]

Cascade, on Dec 15 2006, 09:18 AM, said:

On the spur of the moment I directed a free tournament today.

I direct a teaching tournament every week and last year did up to three or four of these tournaments every week.  Almost every time there is up to two or three players who vanish for whatever reason in the course of the tournament.  These tournaments are also free.

In my free tournament I lost nearly 25% of the players - at least 15 players out of 64 who started the tournament did not finish.  There may have been more if any vanished in the first board I cannot remember.  The numbers come from the traveller for board one compared with the list of final results.

At least two players claimed part way through that they had other commitments - one said the bus was coming to take him to work.

Some complained that the tournament was too slow - although I never once extended the round.  There were six rounds of two boards at 8 minutes per board.  Some of the rounds finished early so that the whole tournament was finished inside 1.5 hrs.

At times when called to the table the player who called me would not answer my questions.

At the end of the tournament not one player thanked me.

Are these experiences normal for free tournaments?

What do other directors who direct free tournaments find?

Wayne you have been yellow for several years so I really wonder this can be new to you. There have never been a firm policy on moral standard on BBO. It is still so. The problems will not go away by themselves - they will grow.

[hotShot]

People don't read the tourney description before they enter a tourney. So they don't know how many boards the tourney has and they don't care about a pickup partnership. So they feel free to leave whenever they want.
Asking to be subbed is the polite approach, most just run.

Although there is no price to win, some player seem so eager to win, that they leave at once, if one score is/will be not good enough.

8 min / board are the usual time given in f2f-Tourneys. But there you usually have to handle boards and write down the results.....
So I think that playing online 8 min/board is a bit long. I found that about half of the field has finished in about 6 min/board and that is is only a small amount of player requires more than 7 min/board.

[1eyedjack]

Cascade, on Dec 15 2006, 08:18 AM, said:

At the end of the tournament not one player thanked me.

Are these experiences normal for free tournaments?

I don't have the time or partners to play in many serious tournaments, but I do quite often drop in and have a go at the free total points tourneys with a pickup.

Perhaps because they are not too serious, I find that the atmosphere is congenial and friendly, with copious expressions of gratitude to the TDs.

[inquiry]

My experience with free tourneys is the same as yours. Frequent runners, and often questions like "WHY SO SLOW" (mine are 7 minutes per board, no added time, but I make adjustments for unfinished boards),

[jikl]

I start at 8 minutes, then 7 minutes for 2nd round on. That seems to work well since I need some minutes for subs in first round.

And yet again, welcome to the world that is Claus, I still find it hard to believe that he can find many things that are negative about any post.

Sean

[csdenmark]

jikl, on Dec 15 2006, 03:22 PM, said:

I start at 8 minutes, then 7 minutes for 2nd round on. That seems to work well since I need some minutes for subs in first round.

And yet again, welcome to the world that is Claus, I still find it hard to believe that he can find many things that are negative about any post.

Sean

There are some basic problems the impact of which are popping up everywhere. They are not dealt with - they are difficult to deal with but very important.

It is no solution to deal with them as individual problems - they are like water and money looking for other ways as soon you think a feasible solution to the problem has been found.

[hrothgar]

Here's a few thoughts regard how one might deal with the large number of disconnects from tournaments.

1. I agree with Claus that this issue needs to be addressed systemically. I disagree with his proposed solutions, but this is nothing new.

2. I think that the primary cause of this problem is that people don't have sufficent options to find a casual game. Players use the free tournaments as an option to play 3-4 boards while waiting for a bus. (I don't know why they don't sit at a normal table). I'd like to once again suggest an option that I call the "Permanent Floating Indy". Create an enormous Indy tournament that is running 24/7. Players can join at any time. Players can leave at any time. The seating gets reshuffled after each round.

A. I think that this Indy would be popular with folks
B. In an ideal world, this would provide an escape valve for the jokers who flit in and out and disrupt the more serious tournaments

3. If the Indy doesn't work, there is always the option to post a bond. Allow TDs to create a tournament where people post a $2.00 bond in order to play. If the player completes the tournament they get their money back. If the player drops out for whatever reason the money goes to a charity fund of some kind. (Hypothetically, BBO could donate the proceeds to whatever charity the ACBL is supporting at the next nationals). I think that it would be a good idea to ensure that neither BBO nor the Directors had a monetary incentive to see that people drop out of games.

Add these two options and I think that your drop out rate will decrease substantially...

[blackshoe]

Interesting. In f2f bridge, sitting down to play in a game, and then leaving after a few boards because "I have another appointment" or some such will get you banned - as well it should! Damned if I see why it should be any different on line.

[inquiry]

The TD can ban the player from future events he runs.

The software will ban you from all tournaments (maybe not pay ones) if you do this too often for a week. And of course your history of these bans will be tracked and could lead to other trouble I guess.

I find directing pay tournaments and BIL tournaments very enjoyable. I find directing free tournaments of 20 to 40 tables open to all a HUGE pain and no joy at all. Why is that? Behavior like what is being discussed in this thread. Why anyone would want to run a random free tourney on a regular schedule is beyond me. I have little to no interest in doing so because of such behaviors.

[hrothgar]

blackshoe, on Dec 15 2006, 07:20 PM, said:

Interesting. In f2f bridge, sitting down to play in a game, and then leaving after a few boards because "I have another appointment" or some such will get you banned - as well it should! Damned if I see why it should be any different on line.

In F2F bridges you don't get the chance to screw up more than once or twice. Once you've been banned from the one or two local clubs within driving distance you're SOOL.

Online bridge provides a plethora of options regarding where/when one should play.
If you get banned from one tournament someone else will be running one 10 minutes later.

[chicken]

Quote

1. Reduce the maximum disconnect percentage at which a player gets a short ban from playing in tournaments. I think it is currently 35% in a week? I would suggest 20% over 2-4 weeks (so that one bad day from an ISP does not get people in trouble).

2. Display a tournament finished percentage as part of everyone's profile. This option would also help players find a more committed partner at the partnership desk. It would also encourage many players to think twice about leaving.

3. Add a director option to allow only players with an x% unfinished rate or less.

Quote

3. If the Indy doesn't work, there is always the option to post a bond. Allow TDs to create a tournament where people post a $2.00 bond in order to play. If the player completes the tournament they get their money back. If the player drops out for whatever reason the money goes to a charity fund of some kind. (Hypothetically, BBO could donate the proceeds to whatever charity the ACBL is supporting at the next nationals). I think that it would be a good idea to ensure that neither BBO nor the Directors had a monetary incentive to see that people drop out of cames.

i like these ones. if they dont behave voluntarily make them pay and allow TDs to choose the abortion ratio. a softwarecontrolled and calculated value "abortionratio" might ease things up. because with the increasing number of TDs any form of coordination is nearly impossible. (or does the thread "exchanging enemylists" still exist?)

the number of offered free tourneys might increase too.....

[mycroft]

I have played in free tournaments and pay ones (and restricted ones as well).

I haven't played all that many - say 40 or so - but I have left *once*. I got a call from my RL bridge club that the TD for the day had fallen ill all of a sudden and they tried other people before they tried me (as I run the game that night); somebody had to be there to open the doors. I let my partner and the TD know this as soon as I could, and gave about 50 minutes warning; giving my partner time to find a sub and the TD time to put him in (he actually subbed me out the next board, but I was capable of playing for another hour).

I was not happy about it, but RL did intervene, as it rarely does - and I stress rarely. I have had players get emergency doctor callins or even emergencies requiring doctor callins at my RL game - it doesn't happen often, but it does happen.

I can't imagine why someone would show up and leave for any non-critical reason - even if they are having a horrible time. It's an hour,folks! (or maybe 1.5 h).

I don't see why players feel they have a right to gripe about CoC of a volunteer-run free tournament. If you don't like it, go somewhere else, or run your own! I admit that some of the CoCs make me feel like I'm playing "almost-bridge", but it's still my choice to play (or not play) in it.

In other words, Wayne, I'm sorry.
Michael.

[sceptic]

Quote

Pretty unusual, I think. The directors who appear to get thanked the most are the ones who are a bit obnoxious in tournament chat and who have tournament chat open to the players, I would guess because the more talkative players are encouraged to speak. It is not a net gain for those directors, because excessive tournament chat also tends to be annoying to many people. I think most people really do appreciate a well-run tournament, although they may not thank the director.

What an arrogant statement, I get thanked for running them ocasionally, the people that do that seem genuine and why the hell do all you experts assume that everyone who plays bridge wants to stick strictly to the rules


I announce that I am not a proffesional director and that most people playing are more qualified than me to make rulings, so do not expect any

and you know what, there is a huge demand for a quick no hassle fun tournement they are usually easy to direct and some times fun

I gather you are well respected as a TD, no idea why with your attitude, but then bridge does seem to suffer from a group of people that do their best and make decisions and another group of people that do nothing but critise and whinge, it would be interesting to do a poll and see where you saw yourself

[jtfanclub]

sceptic, on Dec 15 2006, 02:24 PM, said:

Quote

Pretty unusual, I think. The directors who appear to get thanked the most are the ones who are a bit obnoxious in tournament chat and who have tournament chat open to the players, I would guess because the more talkative players are encouraged to speak. It is not a net gain for those directors, because excessive tournament chat also tends to be annoying to many people. I think most people really do appreciate a well-run tournament, although they may not thank the director.

What an arrogant statement, I get thanked for running them ocasionally, the people that do that seem genuine and why the hell do all you experts assume that everyone who plays bridge wants to stick strictly to the rules

A chatty director is more likely to get thanked for lots of reasons. Easier to find his name to click on it. It estabishes a rapport. It implies that you want to be talked to....and thanking them in chat encourages others to do so. I'm sure there's lots of reasons I can't think of off hand.

I'm sure that lots of people are annoyed by having chat on, since I know lots of those people. I don't know which way the balance tips, though I know which one I prefer (I can't stand playing in tournaments where chat is turned on, especially since people will accidentally use tourney chat to, for example, describe bids).

What is it about these statements you find arrogant? Keep in mind that the person in question not only directs tournaments but also teaches others how to direct tournaments in BBO.

As far as the thanking is concerned, I've found that if I say at the beginning of the last round 'this is the last round, thanks for coming everybody' or suchlike I get thank you's from about 1/4 of the players, while if I don't I get maybe 1 in 20. Part of it I'm sure is that I'm encouraging that sort of reply, and part of it is that it's much easier to click on my name when it's right there.

I don't know what the solution is to people leaving, myself. I played in a Turkish 8 board tournament recently (4 rounds). The director was upset after two boards because so many people needed adjustments due to an Eastern European server being flaky. He canceled it after four boards. These were not people who were leaving because it was too slow, or because they were doing poorly. It was just the connection. But they wouldn't have joined a pay tourney- not when it costs money, and when they new they were likely to have a connection issue. Banning people who leave free tourneys will mostly end up eliminating Eastern European and Chinese players with poor ISPs, and I don't think that's fair to them.

I think that's something we simply have to live with.

[golfacer]

sceptic, on Dec 15 2006, 02:24 PM, said:

Quote

Pretty unusual, I think. The directors who appear to get thanked the most are the ones who are a bit obnoxious in tournament chat and who have tournament chat open to the players, I would guess because the more talkative players are encouraged to speak. It is not a net gain for those directors, because excessive tournament chat also tends to be annoying to many people. I think most people really do appreciate a well-run tournament, although they may not thank the director.

What an arrogant statement, I get thanked for running them ocasionally, the people that do that seem genuine and why the hell do all you experts assume that everyone who plays bridge wants to stick strictly to the rules


I announce that I am not a proffesional director and that most people playing are more qualified than me to make rulings, so do not expect any

and you know what, there is a huge demand for a quick no hassle fun tournement they are usually easy to direct and some times fun

I gather you are well respected as a TD, no idea why with your attitude, but then bridge does seem to suffer from a group of people that do their best and make decisions and another group of people that do nothing but critise and whinge, it would be interesting to do a poll and see where you saw yourself

All I was trying to say is that I think players thank the more vocal directors more often than they thank quiet directors, and that although the quiet directors may not get thanked, most players are still appreciative of the tournament.

I think it is best that I not directly respond to the insults.

[sceptic]

Quote

All I was trying to say is that I think players thank the more vocal directors more often than they thank quiet directors,

maybe I misunderstood this statement below

Quote

The directors who appear to get thanked the most are the ones who are a bit obnoxious in tournament chat and who have tournament chat open to the players

I am actually aware of you trying to educate TD's

I apologise for insulting you as you probably are a decent TD and you are trying to improve the TD standard, I just hope you do not lose sight that this is a social site, not just somewhere for the experts to force onto others a strict set of rules, that propably are as detremental to 90% of bridge players as rudeness is at the table

I still stand by my opinion of your statement.

as for leaving chat on, I think it is the same as banning kibbers if you don't like chat open do not play in that type of tournement and if you want profesional TD's standards, then pay for them.

Fred has given us huge choices on BBO and I just get a bit peeved when I see the pc brigade trying to make us all play bridge at the highest level and highest standards, I always thought this was a social game for fun and as much as I like to improve how I play, it is not life or death and who really gives a toss about a technicality when 1 hand is a bad result, 99% of us should concentrate on our bids and play

may be it counts at top level but not here

[zielona]

I run unclocked tourneys. People rarely complain that they are slow although it happens too, especially when they are unlucky to be stuck with a slow player and rude enough to complain.

6 minutes are plenty to finish the board, especially if all 4 players are fast and have good connections. So are 3 minutes for that matter if a hand is relatively easy and most of them are. No matter how long the round, some will always have to wait and, if arrogant enough, will complain. Less so in unclocked.

25% left the tourney? This hardly ever happens. Two things could contribute: (1) bad connections from one particular region and/or bbo problem (2) subbing too quickly which is quite common in clocked tournaments. I usually wait about 2 minutes.

And the most important one... thanking TD... may I please disagree with most of you. I am a playing TD so have chat open. I am reasonably chatty and quite obnoxious. Rough but not rude I would think. Do get occasional thanks. Appreciate but not enjoy. Always answer, at least with a smile. Can't imagine what would happen if everyone wanted to thank me. Wouldn't have time to respond!
On occasions I thank other TDs too. Usually when they were exceptionally funny or if they had a bit of a tough time.

I've been running free tourneys for 1/2 year now. Love it. Once only got really upset and even complained here. Deal with rude players, slow players, funny ones, weird ones, all sorts. The most difficult are those who cannot read english.
Still, it's fun. For me and I hope for my players.

TD-ing free tourneys is not everyone's cup of tea. Don't like it, don't do it.