[DenisO]

I don't see anything scheduled so far in the Vugraph schedule for the Vanderbilt teams in St Louis. Are we likely to get some coverage?

Denis

[Walddk]

I am pretty certain that we will be showing the Vanderbilt (March 11-17), but I don't think it comes as a major surprise that I haven't received any info from the ACBL yet. Every time for years I had to remind them (Spingold, Reisinger, Vanderbilt, etc.), but it is actually not my job to get in touch with the organisers. It is their job to contact me if they want BBO to get commentators for an event.

Obviously, they don't have to tell us anything in order to broadcast (our software is free for vugraph purposes), but I very much doubt that they intend to get their own commentators. I also think that the ACBL would like to have the event listed on our vugraph schedule web page.

I don't know anything at this point, so we must wait and see. I will be happy to coordinate this as I do with all tournaments, big as well as small, but I can't do a lot without information.

In our vugraph guidelines it is outlined that we require 3 weeks advance notice if the organisers want us to provide this service (getting commentators). That won't happen this time either, and frankly speaking, I can't see why the ACBL should be an exception to that rule.

It is my call if the notice is too short. I am usually very co-operative in this regard, time permitting, and I will likely be it again when I get some info.

Roland

[DenisO]

Perhaps BBOers who are ACBL members ( especially in the St Louis area) could lobby their representatives to get things moving. As well as commentators they are going to need experienced Vugraph operators - and this shouldn't be left to last minute appeals in the Daily Bulletin. Hopefully the ACBL will have asked for a decent internet connection when they booked the venue.

[Gerben42]

As usual for ACBL events we do not know much in advance, and there have been other occasions where there has been very small coverage from their big events.

I for one do not understand the ACBL. After all it is the largest bridge federation in the world and like any other bridge federation I assume they want to "sell" their product, which are bridge tournaments.

I think they are doing themselves and the game of Bridge a big disservice by not broadcasting, or even by not telling BBO (in this case Roland) well in advance about their broadcast of what is going to be a very nice tournament (after all these NABCs are like mini-world championships nowadays!).

Let's remind ourselves that so many other NBOs manage, from the smallest to the largest. Ceterum censeo... that every world class tournament should have "notify BBO about our Vugraph" on their todo list.

[Walddk]

What strikes me as odd is that for some time the United States Bridge Federation (USBF) and Jan Martel have realised how important the internet is, whereas the ACBL apparently regards live internet broadcasts as a minor issue.

Everything is decided at the last minute, and as Denis points out, the ACBL adverstises for volunteer operators in the Daily Bulletins on site. That is much too late in my view. Outside Memphis organisers plan and test this weeks before.

There is a reason why we write the following in our vugraph guidelines:

"The most critical factor in determining the success of these broadcasts is the quality of the operators. It is vital that these people become familiar with the software before the actual broadcast takes place. The software is easy to learn and it is subsequently easy to use, but operators should spend at least a couple of hours practicing before the actual event."

All of us know that this does not always happen in real life, but to be fair not only in USA.

We always get accurate info from the USBF well in advance. That is not the case as far as the ACBL is concerned. All ACBL members are also automatic members of the USBF, so one would assume that both federations are interested in serving their members as well as possible.

I recall the headline "Reisinger Fiasco" in this forum; I suppose most of you do. I would just hate to see "Vanderbilt Fiasco" next.

Roland

[hrothgar]

Gerben42, on Mar 5 2007, 08:25 PM, said:

I for one do not understand the ACBL. After all it is the largest bridge federation in the world and like any other bridge federation I assume they want to "sell" their product, which are bridge tournaments.

The ACBL really isn't all that big any more...

Last time that I checked, ACBL membership was 155,876

In contrast, the French Bridge Federation has slightly more than a hundred thousand members. The Dutch has 90,000 plus. Even a relatively small country like Denmark has more than 25,000

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Mar 5 2007, 08:50 PM, said:

Even a relatively small country like Denmark has more than 25,000

I dare say. All of Denmark has a population around half of New York City's (5 million ... 9 million).

Roland

[Gerben42]

Quote

Last time that I checked, ACBL membership was 155,876.

Still more than any other federation. Charge every member two cents ($0.02) and you can pay for the internet connection even in hotels that really charge way too much for it.

[mike777]

I think it is a bit much to expect the ACBL to go out of its way to put its major bridge events on the internet. How many of its members or for that matter WBF members worldwide even own a computer let alone use the internet. Why should the ACBL devote resources for this internet thingy anyway, I am sure they have much more important things to do guys and gals.

[uday]

The ACBL does put its major events on the internet, and has gradually been increasing coverage. It has covered the "big" events from each of the nationals for the past several years.

Each phone line costs about 200/day, IIRC, and most venues don't offer anything more reasonable. I don't know what non-volunteer operators would cost, but I'd guess 100-200 per day.

Anyway, the truth is that at some point we'll find out what the Vandy vug schedule will be. Maybe I'll email Rick and see if he knows.

[glen]

My feeling is that the ACBL arrives at the NABC site first, unpacks a whole lot, confirms what can and cannot be done after a couple of days, knows what rooms are available etc, and only then wants to lock down a vugraph schedule.

[hrothgar]

uday, on Mar 6 2007, 09:43 PM, said:

The ACBL does put its major events on the internet, and has gradually been increasing coverage. It has covered the "big" events from each of the nationals for the past several years.

Each phone line costs about 200/day, IIRC, and most venues don't offer anything more reasonable. I don't know what non-volunteer operators would cost, but I'd guess 100-200 per day.

Anyway, the truth is that at some point we'll find out what the Vandy vug schedule will be. Maybe I'll email Rick and see if he knows.

Here's one possible idea that would (probably) work at most venues.

Get the right cable and you can use a cell phone as a modem...

Sure, you need to use minutes, but won't cost nearly as much as what the hotels charge. Alternatively, if you're worried about cellphone reception, you can always invest in some kind of wireless bridge and place someone with a laptop down at the nearest Starbucks.

[pclayton]

Don't most modern American hotels have Wi-Fi anyway?

[pbleighton]

"Don't most modern American hotels have Wi-Fi anyway?"

Yes, and sometimes it even works.

Peter

[fred]

pclayton, on Mar 6 2007, 10:21 PM, said:

Don't most modern American hotels have Wi-Fi anyway?

They tend to block it in the convention areas so that they can charge exhibitors a fortune to turn it on.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jtfanclub]

hrothgar, on Mar 6 2007, 05:12 PM, said:

Get the right cable and you can use a cell phone as a modem....

http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wireles...lmodemspeed.htm

Most cellphones these days are GSM. 9600 baud base, minus whatever interference you have...it gets *slow*.

http://marriott.com/hotels/travel/stlsa-re...-hotel-airport/

They've got wireless in public areas. Why not just use that?

(Just saw Fred's answer)

Guess you'd have to get a room nearby and use Bluetooth....

[cnszsun]

It's a bit strange to me that the hotel charges extra fees for internet conection.
In China, almost all hotels provide LAN in each room freely. In convention area, in order to fulfill vugraph coverage, you can set up wireless access point by yourself. If you don't need hotel to provide hardwares, i don't think hotel will charge you extra fees. For example, the vugraph facility of recent Yeh bros cup was built up by one of my friend. I believe most costs have been spent on hardwares (but reusable) and manpower (but most volunteer).

[nickf]

mike777, on Mar 7 2007, 03:24 AM, said:

I think it is a bit much to expect the ACBL to go out of its way to put its major bridge events on the internet. How many of its members or for that matter WBF members worldwide even own a computer let alone use the internet. Why should the ACBL devote resources for this internet thingy anyway, I am sure they have much more important things to do guys and gals.

I guess it's all about bringing the game to the people. Or marketing their events on a world wide basis in the hope that online kibitzers may one day travel to an event in that locale. Or providing a service to its members unable to travel the lengths of the country to watch high quality bridge in person.

This year the Australian Bridge Federation has committed to invest over $15K to establish a VuGraph unit and broadcast the finals of major teams events over BBO. This is budgeted as a marketing, rather than an operations costs.

The ABF has appointed a (paid) National VuGraph Coordinator, spent about $5000 on infrastructure and for the first time are paying BBO operators. Such a forward thinking approach is to be commended. Surely the ACBL, with about 4 times as many members, should realise the cost-benefit of a similar approach.

nickf
sydney

[geller]

American hotels typically try to make money on extra services. If organizers are serious about VuGraph they should negotiate the terms of the intenet connection before they sign the contract with the hotel. They could probably negotiate pretty good terms (free or nearly free) then. Once they've signed the basic contract it's too late.

I think if VuGraph featured voice rather than text commentary it might take off more, and maybe even attract sponsors. Fred, what are the prospects for voice commentary in terms of bandwidth cost?

-Bob