[Walddk]

Over the past few months I have received many private chat messages and e-mails regarding slow play during vugraph broadcast. Not the kind of messages one would assume in this context: the play is too slow. To the contrary!

They are unhappy because declarers (and rarely defenders) claim too often. Consequently, our operators do the same.

Many spectators can't see why a claim is in order. One of the points is that most kibitzers are intermediates and or advanced and that it is very difficult, sometimes even impossible, for them to see why declarer has the rest, or the rest minus 1 trick to give a couple of examples.

I don't think that we will ever be in a position to decide that the players must play the hands out in order to make the presentations more spectator friendly. I do know, however, what I think if we really had that option.

What do you think?

Roland

[Echognome]

I think this is a perfect area where having good commentators makes all the difference. What might help after a claim is to have the board stay up for a few moments before going on to the next board. Then if the commentators can discuss why the claim was good, it would be useful.

I guess ideally, having a break-out room to discuss the hands either during the broadcast (say in another window) or after the broadcast ends, would be a nice feature. It would be great, in particular if the software had a more usable format for interacting with the spectators without it becoming a massive text spout.

One idea for the latter is to build into the software more of a learning environment (which might be useful for teaching sessions as well). I know in our company software, if you want to speak you click on a little hand icon to raise your hand. Only then, if the moderator selects you can you speak. I think this would be well suited for a large online teaching environment. Furthermore, people can speak to the moderators in private.

[Aberlour10]

Echognome, on Jul 3 2007, 03:52 PM, said:

I think this is a perfect area where having good commentators makes all the difference. What might help after a claim is to have the board stay up for a few moments before going on to the next board.  Then if the commentators can discuss why the claim was good, it would be useful.

As a one of these "average" interm/adv spectators I would support this idea.
For example,not every squeeze is plausible for a player like me and it would be nice if the commentators would short pointed out such "claim" situations.

Robert

[FrancesHinden]

I think part of the problem is that "claim" during a vugraph broadcast can mean

- the operator didn't get a chance to see what was played to the last couple of tricks because they went too fast
- we just had a power cut/disconnect and they were trying to catch up

Most broadcasts I see there are 1 or 2 claims that I'm sure can't have been actual claims at the table.

What do I think? To be honest, mainly that we have to live with it. Any cure I can think of is worse than the disease. Prompting players on vugraph to bid/play clearly every now and again wouldn't hurt, but will swiftly be forgotten in the heat of battle.

[skjaeran]

As Frances say, some of the claims we see aren't actual claims. The players sometimes play so fast that the operator is unable to follow the play, thus waits and "claims" the number of tricks scored.

We've got to remember that the players aren't there for our benefit. They're there to play whatever championship or tournament they compete in, and trying to play up to their abilities. That includes playing in their own tempo and making claims obvious to them and their opponents. At times they need to think for a long time to find the best plan. At other times they claim to save time. I couldn't even think of asking the players to slow down or speed up their play to accomodate the kibitzers on the online vugraph. (Neither could the organizers nor the players.)

We just have to be happy that the organizers allow broadcasts and that operators and commentators use of their own spare time to entertain all others. We've got no right to claim perfect conditions for people watching the broadcasts. We should be happy with what we get - which is in fact terrific IMO!

[barmar]

In addition to the "operator can't keep up" claims, I expect that there are more real claims in high-level bridge matches than the games many intermediates are used to. They don't have to worry about the opponents not understanding the line they're claiming. There have been some well-known cases where experts have claimed early in the hand on a complicated squeeze, based on inferences from the bidding. Have you ever been defending, dummy, or kibbing a hand, and wondered why declarer isn't making the obvious claim? That NEVER happens in an championship game.

[Trinidad]

Aberlour10, on Jul 3 2007, 04:59 PM, said:

Echognome, on Jul 3 2007, 03:52 PM, said:

I think this is a perfect area where having good commentators makes all the difference. What might help after a claim is to have the board stay up for a few moments before going on to the next board.  Then if the commentators can discuss why the claim was good, it would be useful.

As a one of these "average" interm/adv spectators I would support this idea.
For example,not every squeeze is plausible for a player like me and it would be nice if the commentators would short pointed out such "claim" situations.

Robert

I think this is a good idea.

Quote

I think part of the problem is that "claim" during a vugraph broadcast can mean

- the operator didn't get a chance to see what was played to the last couple of tricks because they went too fast
- we just had a power cut/disconnect and they were trying to catch up

Most broadcasts I see there are 1 or 2 claims that I'm sure can't have been actual claims at the table.

It might be good to give the operator an alternative or two:
- just entering the number of tricks won (and showing that this is not a claim, but merely entering a score or showing a brief "lost track" message where it otherwise would show "claim".)
- An irregularity button for revokes, etc.

Rik

[paulg]

skaeran, on Jul 4 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

We've got to remember that the players aren't there for our benefit. They're there to play whatever championship or tournament they compete in, and trying to play up to their abilities. That includes playing in their own tempo and making claims obvious to them and their opponents. At times they need to think for a long time to find the best plan. At other times they claim to save time. I couldn't even think of asking the players to slow down or speed up their play to accomodate the kibitzers on the online vugraph. (Neither could the organizers nor the players.)

I completely agree with Harald.

However I do think the players on Vugraph have some responsibility to the game of bridge too, so should be happy to confirm the result of the board to the operator and pass explanatory notes once they are finished by them.

This is analogous to the interview last Saturday on Cricket AM with Ronnie Irani, the ex-Essex captain. He said that professional cricket players had a responsibility to give a little back to the game and ensure that it remained relevant to future generations. Specifically the Essex players were expected to sign autographs after the games and not just rush off in their courtesy cars.

Keeping kids coming to cricket is important to the future of the game.

Getting more people watching vugraph is also important.

Paul

[skjaeran]

cardsharp, on Jul 5 2007, 09:47 AM, said:

skaeran, on Jul 4 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

We've got to remember that the players aren't there for our benefit. They're there to play whatever championship or tournament they compete in, and trying to play up to their abilities. That includes playing in their own tempo and making claims obvious to them and their opponents. At times they need to think for a long time to find the best plan. At other times they claim to save time. I couldn't even think of asking the players to slow down or speed up their play to accomodate the kibitzers on the online vugraph. (Neither could the organizers nor the players.)

I completely agree with Harald.

However I do think the players on Vugraph have some responsibility to the game of bridge too, so should be happy to confirm the result of the board to the operator and pass explanatory notes once they are finished by them.

This is analogous to the interview last Saturday on Cricket AM with Ronnie Irani, the ex-Essex captain. He said that professional cricket players had a responsibility to give a little back to the game and ensure that it remained relevant to future generations. Specifically the Essex players were expected to sign autographs after the games and not just rush off in their courtesy cars.

Keeping kids coming to cricket is important to the future of the game.

Getting more people watching vugraph is also important.

Paul

As operator I'd ask a player what card he played if I couldn't see it. And if I was unsure of the result after a claim, I'd ask. So would all Norwegian operators (I don't do it often, I'm normally either playing or directing when we broadcast).

[shoeless]

As an operator, it has been my experience, that players on vu, are generally very co-operative in trying to help the operator make a good presentation. Confirming results, showing cards, even holding up explanation notes of alerts and bids.

However, there is a danger that vugraph operations at the table can be invasive to the competition - creating isues in normal game tempo or interrupting psychological processes. I, for one, cannot agree that an operator should ask to see a card that was played in the middle of the play of a hand.

On balance, I think that the BBO vugraph presentations are pretty good - perhaps we need to control and develop that which is left to us - being better commentators and being better spectators.

How about a 'Spectator's Guide' to watching BBO vugraph?

[Echognome]

Perhaps the solution, if not today, but in the near future would be barcode readers. We already barcode the cards to be dealt in the duplimate machines. Maybe the vugraph table could have barcode readers for the play. Players move the cards under the barcode reader as (or after) they play the card and it is automatically registered. This would allow the operator to focus on different aspects.

[pclayton]

There's two goals here and we've talked about the other in another thread.

When declarer plays too fast - or claims, it detracts for the newer players. When the play goes to slow, it detracts for everyone.

A built in lag could (I'm not saying it would) help to solve both of these issues.

I'm sure Richard likes the security aspect of it too

[jocdelevat]

if b/i plus adv players cannot figure out why was claim they should save the hand and check it later. it will be a good exercise too.

[buddyshah]

During April Netcast from Bombay --With the permission of the Organising body and Technical comittee and tournament director We had 1 Card reader at the Table .

His / her job was to announce the card on the table after the release, and this did help to a great extent for the VG operator.

Still i agree some claims are very difficult to put in by a vg operator.

[JanM]

As an operator, I almost always ask for confirmation of the number of tricks claimed when the hand is over. Sometimes I can be pretty sure I know, but other times I can't and since we don't want to have to change the score in the movie (that loses the bidding and play records, in case you didn't know), it's important to make the claim properly. It's also important not to communicate when we (operator or commentators) disagree with the claim, btw, that's not appropriate, so asking always is better than asking only when the claim seems wrong. Also, I don't think the players mind being asked how many tricks were claimed, since that question comes when they are in between hands.

OTOH, I virtually never ask to see a card that has been played, although I have asked some of the most egregious card-hiders to please try to place their cards on the table so I can see them (leading Jeff Meckstroth to say "but you can see the cards on the computer in front of you, why do you have to see what I'm playing?" in all seriousness - when I said that the computer told me which cards started in his hand, not which ones were currently there, everyone laughed). After that, Jeff did try to do a better job of playing his cards, but of course his primary concern was playing bridge, not letting me report what had been played. I think that's fairly typical of players - they don't want to make life difficult for the Vugraph operator, but they don't want to be distracted from the hand being played either. For some, handing over the notes about bidding is a distraction, for others it isn't. Some tend to hunch over the table and leave their hand on the cards they've played, some play the cards and then lean back. Some play very fast, some take their time. We can't really expect them to change their habits significantly for the benefit of the Vugraph audience, although we can ask for some clarifications.

[paulg]

JanM, on Aug 3 2007, 09:56 PM, said:

(leading Jeff Meckstroth to say "but you can see the cards on the computer in front of you, why do you have to see what I'm playing?" in all seriousness - when I said that the computer told me which cards started in his hand, not which ones were currently there, everyone laughed). After that, Jeff did try to do a better job of playing his cards, but of course his primary concern was playing bridge, not letting me report what had been played.

I was there when Jeff asked you if there were any "green" cards on the screen as he was trying to make an impossible partscore in the semi-final. Everyone laughed again.

You were appropriately poker-faced

Paul

[shoeless]

Thanks for that Paul - wonderful little story about the nature of one world class player. Too bad Jan is such a pro - a response of "Yes, several, can't you find them?" would have been delicious.

[JanM]

You're right, I should have been alert enough to say that . In actual fact, I don't use GIB often enough to have "green cards" instantly trigger the image of a hand where one has invoked GIB's double dummy analysis, so it took me a while to figure out what he meant.

[Echognome]

Jlall, on Aug 3 2007, 08:46 AM, said:

I have to admit I don't like the thought of not claiming/moving my cards under a bar code reader/operators asking me what card I played/anything that hurts the focus of the game. I mean really bridge requires huge amounts of concentration and these things are very distracting (except not claiming which is just tedious).

I think this is a fair point. I'm just trying to think up some ideas. What about cameras (I'm thinking of the webcam type variety, not anything fancy)? A few strategically based camers might help the operator see the cards better and it wouldn't be as obtrusive as a card scanner. It seems to work in poker anyway.