[mr1303]

Hi all

When organising a pairs event with a vugraph table, what is a good movement to use?

The idea is to try and get as many people as possible on to vugraph at some point, so a Mitchell movement wouldn't work. We'll be using approximately 25 tables.

Mark

[geller]

A Mitchell should work OK if you change the movement. In a normal Mitchell the boards go down, NS stays, and EW go up. Say you change it so the boards stay, NS moves up, and EW skips up. Then if you use (say) table 1 as the Vugraph table you'll have
R NS EW Boards
1 1 1 1-2
2 13 12 1-2
3 12 10 1-2
etc.
When there's a skip round (with an even number of tables) then NS moves up and EW moves up three tables.

The only drawback of the above is that the same boards will be on Vu Graph all the time. That might or might not be interesting to the specs. You could avoid that by using a barometer if you don't mind duplicating all the boards for each table.

[Walddk]

I suggest that you do it the way you have seen it in Norway just now. Let the current leaders be at the BBO table and let their opponents come to them. You will likely get new leaders frequently, and you will get lots of pairs to the one table.

Even new pairs if the leaders keep the lead for a longer period of time.

Roland

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Aug 3 2006, 03:02 PM, said:

I suggest that you do it the way you have seen it in Norway just now. Let the current leaders be at the BBO table and let their opponents come to them. You will likely get new leaders frequently, and you will get lots of pairs to the one table.

Even new pairs if the leaders keep the lead for a longer period of time.

Roland

Doesn't that require a barometer?

For better or worse, many locals (including most of North America) don't have the physcial infrastructure necessary to run a barometer. I don't know more than a handful of North American districts that have all the bididng machines, extra boards, and the like required to support this type of movement...

Not sure how common the paraphenalia is in Britain. (Most types that I've played in a Baramoter were in Iceland)

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Aug 3 2006, 02:06 PM, said:

Walddk, on Aug 3 2006, 03:02 PM, said:

I suggest that you do it the way you have seen it in Norway just now. Let the current leaders be at the BBO table and let their opponents come to them. You will likely get new leaders frequently, and you will get lots of pairs to the one table.

Even new pairs if the leaders keep the lead for a longer period of time.

Roland

Doesn't that require a barometer?

For better or worse, many locals (including most of North America) don't have the physcial infrastructure necessary to run a barometer. I don't know more than a handful of North American districts that have all the bididng machines, extra boards, and the like required to support this type of movement...

Not sure how common the paraphenalia is in Britain. (Most types that I've played in a Baramoter were in Iceland)

Yes it does, and I know that this is the organisers' intention because Mark and I had a chat about it. We agree that pairs events without "instant" result service are not suited for vugraph.

I also know that Mark & Co. will have access to Bridgemate, so this should not cause a problem.

Roland

[mr1303]

Took the words right out of my mouth Roland...

Yes, the EBU have been nice enough to give us free use of Bridgemate scorers, as long as we let one of their people come down to the camp to supervise their use.

But back to the movement issue:

As a general rule, is it better to have the leaders on vugraph all the time (presumably to improve the presentation by having the best quality play) or to give all the players an opportunity to be on vugraph? The camp is open to all junior bridge players, regardless of ability.

I don't have a strong opinion on this either way, but I'd like to hear other opinions