History function delays game restrict History use til end of round
#1
Posted 2020-August-04, 12:06
However, it is clear that many players check "Other Tables" after each hand which delays the game and is a real distraction.
(Truth in advertising; I sometimes am guilty of doing that myself.)
My suggestion is to disable "History" until the end of the match OR, if that is too drastic a measure, restrict "History" to the time between the end of the round until the start of the next round.
That is an incentive to play a bit more quickly and does interfere with actual play in any way.
#2
Posted 2020-August-04, 14:34
If it distracts you, you can hide the side pane (I've actually suggested that for a couple of my partners, who internalize poor results, even if they're just unlucky poor results (or, more commonly, even if they're unlucky-in-their-choice-of-partner poor results)). If other people's delay is distracting, bid the next hand or, if you're not dealer and after a suitable time to read the traveller, ask for the next hand to start.
Be prepared to be overruled by the rest of the table's preferred pace of play (unless it's a clocked tournament, in which case, if there's too much talking and not enough playing, call the TD to get it to the end of the round).
Note: I have been playing some (relatively) high-level bridge recently. With discussions and a peek at the hand after, we still manage to run 2x12 board match in 2 hours give or take 5 minutes. It can be done.
#3
Posted 2020-August-06, 14:11
mycroft, on 2020-August-04, 14:34, said:
If it distracts you, you can hide the side pane (I've actually suggested that for a couple of my partners, who internalize poor results, even if they're just unlucky poor results (or, more commonly, even if they're unlucky-in-their-choice-of-partner poor results)). If other people's delay is distracting, bid the next hand or, if you're not dealer and after a suitable time to read the traveller, ask for the next hand to start.
Be prepared to be overruled by the rest of the table's preferred pace of play (unless it's a clocked tournament, in which case, if there's too much talking and not enough playing, call the TD to get it to the end of the round).
Note: I have been playing some (relatively) high-level bridge recently. With discussions and a peek at the hand after, we still manage to run 2x12 board match in 2 hours give or take 5 minutes. It can be done.
I am primarily thinking about timed tournaments. Players who dawdle over results on hands 4 and 5 and then get us timed out on board 6 are very annoying but if the resuts are there it is human nature to peek. A little bit of programming could solve the problem.
#4
Posted 2020-August-06, 15:11
Personally I agree with you which is why team matches that I play in do not show the running score or History. However tournaments that I run are barometer because I know my club members prefer that.
#5
Posted 2020-August-06, 15:12
Again, history isn't terribly relevant - without the comparisons (which I did think weren't available in real time a while back, just end-of-round. Maybe I just didn't look before), they'll just argue about whether 3♥ was obviously forcing, or "You can make game" (because the trumps break 2-2 and two finesses are onside) or "doesn't the 6 obviously discourage?"
Local "tourist" event I play occasionally (which I will admit is one of the stronger club games in existence) is 9x3 IMP pairs. We are given 21 minutes per round; if it takes my table more than 15, we're almost always the last ones done. Finishes usually in 2h40. And yes, everyone looks at history, may even say something. But then we play the next board.
I absolutely agree with you, that we shouldn't give slow players something else to be slow about. But this isn't the quick fix you're hoping for.
#6
Posted 2020-September-05, 03:50
Please come back to the live game; I directed enough online during COVID for several lifetimes.
Bruce McIntyre,
#7
Posted 2020-September-06, 06:45
#8
Posted 2021-April-21, 00:36
Has anyone any ideas??
#9
Posted 2021-April-25, 20:03
You can fix it by switching between landscape and portrait.
#12
Posted 2021-April-30, 11:28
If you're regularly not done when the director calls the round, you're slow (at least, you're slow for that game). If the director is calling the round from your table more often than not (because she's passing boards and making sure you finish), you're slow. If the director is calling too fast a game for the room, they will be speeding up different tables each round.
I'm one of those who will call the round when about 75-80% of the tables are done. Yes, that sounds like "early for their own funeral", but the first pairs have already refreshed their coffee and are running out of things to talk about that won't tell the other tables how to play the next round. And most of that 20% will finish by the time I finish calling the round. And those that, regularly, don't - let's just say that they feel no pressure to finish if the round *hasn't* been called ("What's your problem, we still have time?").
And given the choice between the slow players leaving because they're too frustrated and the *fast* players leaving because they're too frustrated, I know where I live.
#13
Posted 2021-May-01, 10:12
mycroft, on 2021-April-30, 11:28, said:
I was thinking of one specific director who would tell the room to hurry up about ten minutes into a fifteen-minute round, among other things. I often noticed him calling rounds several minutes early, with the wall clock in easy view to everyone but him.
At one newly formed club where I was directing I had to gradually wean players off slowness by lowering the time limits to ACBL standards and refusing to let players start boards with one minute left in the round. I know both sides of the equation, and I still consider the term "early for his own funeral" a good description of the director in question.
#14
Posted 2021-May-01, 11:15
morecharac, on 2021-May-01, 10:12, said:
At one newly formed club where I was directing I had to gradually wean players off slowness by lowering the time limits to ACBL standards and refusing to let players start boards with one minute left in the round. I know both sides of the equation, and I still consider the term "early for his own funeral" a good description of the director in question.
F2F, I don't let players start boards with less than *four* minutes left on a round (OTOH I will never interrupt a board once started, or tell the room to hurry up either). I also have no compunction about calling rounds several minutes "early", if the hands are such that almost every table has finished and people are getting restless. I'm not the kind who would be early for my own funeral, I just consider effective time management part of my duties. All but the slowest pairs seem comfortable with this and even they prefer it to the previous style of letting things run out of control every round and then screaming at them to play it out quickly.
Maybe that last point is the key - manners and consistency are probably more important than actual methods.
#15
Posted 2021-May-01, 14:32
But that was the one where we played 13x2 in 2h45, 2h50 if it was slow.
#16
Posted 2021-May-01, 15:03
mycroft, on 2021-May-01, 14:32, said:
But that was the one where we played 13x2 in 2h45, 2h50 if it was slow.
Last week it was my club's turn to host a regional tournament online. When a senior director saw that I was regularly calling the round with 3-4 tables still playing, he urged me to ease off, because the the slow tables would never catch up. I knew what I was doing. We finished 20 boards in 2h15 despite many inexperienced online.
#17
Posted 2021-May-02, 01:27
squeezergb, on 2020-September-06, 06:45, said:
Sorry it's taken me more than six months to spot this!
We got multiple complaints when we turned it off, almost exclusively from the faster players who clearly get bored in the timed events. The slower players are the same ones who are slow in real life and they are monitored and it is not the history function that is the problem.