[gwnn]

How is my tournament completion rate 90%? I have not bailed on a tournament that I can remember, at least not in the last 5 years or so. There was a speedball where I lost my connection for 30 seconds at trick 6 of board 11, I ran with my laptop to a better wifi spot, me and my p both begged the paid ACBL director to let me back in, both got ghosted, sub ruined our score on the next board (last of the tournament) with a terrible opening lead, thanks, gg. Is that the tournament where my "completion rate" got hurt? An incompetent TD doesn't know how to sub me back in and the conclusion is that I bailed on the tournament?

This is the tournament from my partner's POV:

https://www.bridgeba...rname=coolbeans

[smerriman]

It's a 60 day rolling average so dropping to 90% makes sense mathematically if you only played 10 tournaments in the last 60 days (that always felt a bit small a range to me).

But since you're famous no doubt someone like barmar can fix it for you

(I saw you ranked 14th overall on the bidder's challenge leaderboard btw, nice job!)

[gwnn]

smerriman, on 2021-October-26, 02:34, said:

It's a 60 day rolling average so dropping to 90% makes sense mathematically if you only played 10 tournaments in the last 60 days (that always felt a bit small a range to me).

But since you're famous no doubt someone like barmar can fix it for you

(I saw you ranked 14th overall on the bidder's challenge leaderboard btw, nice job!)

I think 10 tournaments in the last 60 days sounds about right. Still not good enough internet to stream much.

Thanks for the congrats although I rage quit after everyone assumed 4M-5m was a cue without discussion. Not saying I think it should be natural per se, just that it was not on the CC and I didn't wanna risk anything. Also the hand where there was an obv 1m-1H-p-2m; p-4H bid rewarded less than 10 because the "expert bid" was 3m annoyed me.

[Mr Dale]

After reading your post I checked my tournament completion record - and it's 76%! After a moment's thought I realized why. If my partner plays the last hand I don't wait to see the result but log off as soon as I see what he had, Since he plays the hand about 25% of the time, you can expect my completion rate to be around 75% so that seems to be a logical explanation.
Why would I or anybody else care what my completion rate is?

[gwnn]

Mr Dale, on 2021-October-27, 06:56, said:

After reading your post I checked my tournament completion record - and it's 76%! After a moment's thought I realized why. If my partner plays the last hand I don't wait to see the result but log off as soon as I see what he had, Since he plays the hand about 25% of the time, you can expect my completion rate to be around 75% so that seems to be a logical explanation.
Why would I or anybody else care what my completion rate is?

Some tournaments don't allow you to participate without a high enough BCR or TCR.

I personally just don't like seeing a "90" there, or if I do, I'd like to know it's because I ragequit rather than being stonewalled by a random director.

[armantt2k]

Mr Dale, on 2021-October-27, 06:56, said:

After reading your post I checked my tournament completion record - and it's 76%! After a moment's thought I realized why. If my partner plays the last hand I don't wait to see the result but log off as soon as I see what he had, Since he plays the hand about 25% of the time, you can expect my completion rate to be around 75% so that seems to be a logical explanation.
Why would I or anybody else care what my completion rate is?

I was told by a VACB TD to never logoff early on the last board because if a Robot is substituted for you, the Robot's name is reported to ACBL (not you) and you will not get credited for any MPs.

This happened to my wife when she lost connection on board 18 of 18 and a robot was inserted to finish playing her hand on defense. Sure enough, I got MPs for the session but my partner (my wife) didn't.

However, I don't see the need for inserting a robot into Dummy's seat, except if there's a bug in BBO that insists there be names (human or robot) attached to all 4 seats (including Dummy) for play to continue.

[ThomasRush]

Mr Dale, on 2021-October-27, 06:56, said:

[snippage]
Why would I or anybody else care what my completion rate is?

People who quit (or even are disconnected) in the middle of a tournament place a high burden on the tournament director. It seems very reasonable to me that a director might choose to exclude players who don't have high completion rates.

A 90% completion rate implies that one person in every two-and-a-half tables will disappear in the middle of the game. Running a 20-table tournament? That's eight people *gone*. A 100-table game? That's 40 people you have to find a sub for. Or, you can just sub in a robot, but plenty of people hate playing against robots -- not to mention the person who has to partner the robot (and who may then also leave because of it). Any player who leaves in the middle of a tournament lowers the quality of the event for the other players.

[mycroft]

And as mentioned repeatedly in other threads, it doesn't matter to the tournament director why you leave(*), whether it's ragequit, or business "emergency", or medical emergency, or bad internet or power, or... It's not a reflection on the player, just a guideline to how much of a burden the player is likely to be on the game.

(*)with, I admit, Mr. Dale's exception "logout if dummy on the last board". Perhaps the "runner" rules can be changed to not count this. Except maybe if declarer is about to make or accept a bum claim. Or the TD needs to be called because of mis- or unclear information. Or you forgot the auction and you're actually declarer. Or it turns out there are 8 rounds today instead of the usual 7. Or board 20 isn't in fact the last board of the last round. Or ... But also, while I'm well known for giving the advice of "check out when you're dummy; it gives you more concentration on the rest of the hands, and improve partnership harmony if you don't back-seat drive", it still seems a little uncharitable to partner that after 2 hours, he's not important enough to stick around for the last 3 minutes to see how he does.

[gwnn]

mycroft, on 2021-October-28, 12:39, said:

And as mentioned repeatedly in other threads, it doesn't matter to the tournament director why you leave(*), whether it's ragequit, or business "emergency", or medical emergency, or bad internet or power, or... It's not a reflection on the player, just a guideline to how much of a burden the player is likely to be on the game.

(*)with, I admit, Mr. Dale's exception "logout if dummy on the last board". Perhaps the "runner" rules can be changed to not count this. Except maybe if declarer is about to make or accept a bum claim. Or the TD needs to be called because of mis- or unclear information. Or you forgot the auction and you're actually declarer. Or it turns out there are 8 rounds today instead of the usual 7. Or board 20 isn't in fact the last board of the last round. Or ... But also, while I'm well known for giving the advice of "check out when you're dummy; it gives you more concentration on the rest of the hands, and improve partnership harmony if you don't back-seat drive", it still seems a little uncharitable to partner that after 2 hours, he's not important enough to stick around for the last 3 minutes to see how he does.

So you think it's fair that player A:
-gets disconnected on board 5
-gets reconnected and is put back in time for board 6 or 7
-finishes the tournament
Or player B:
-gets disconnected on board 11
-gets reconnected and is put back in time for board 12
-finishes the tournament
Are counted as having completed it

While player C who was just ignored by the TD, not even an "oops my bad" is counted as a burden?

[mycroft]

I repeat:

• I don't work for BBO.
  
• TCR is a flag for tournament organizers to allow them to determine how much work they're willing to go through for disconnected players. I know that when my partner or I are disconnected, when we reconnect, the software brings us back in, provided they haven't replaced with a sub already (I think even if so, we will be replaced next hand). So, that's "no work" for the TD (besides a potential "she's gone" call).

I don't know the rules, I don't make the rules. I think expecting 95+% TCR is overboard; especially in India or other places where internet disconnections are expected. I think expecting 80% TCR is probably reasonable - but it does mean that ~one player a table needs to have a substitute found.

Might there be a better solution? Sure. I'm describing what is, though, not what should be.

[gwnn]

mycroft, on 2021-November-08, 11:27, said:

I repeat:

• I don't work for BBO.
  
• TCR is a flag for tournament organizers to allow them to determine how much work they're willing to go through for disconnected players. I know that when my partner or I are disconnected, when we reconnect, the software brings us back in, provided they haven't replaced with a sub already (I think even if so, we will be replaced next hand). So, that's "no work" for the TD (besides a potential "she's gone" call).

I don't know the rules, I don't make the rules. I think expecting 95+% TCR is overboard; especially in India or other places where internet disconnections are expected. I think expecting 80% TCR is probably reasonable - but it does mean that ~one player a table needs to have a substitute found.

Might there be a better solution? Sure. I'm describing what is, though, not what should be.

I didn't say that you work for BBO But, whether or not you like it, you were justifying a system that arbitrarily favors people who are disconnected on Board 5 and people who get disconnected on Board 11 who don't get stonewalled by directors. If the system were "disconnections per month" or similar, sure, you would be making sense. The way you are arguing (in two posts) does not even acknowledge what my point is (explained in two posts), and that is disrespectful, but whatever, I was trying to just highlight a problem and oops BBF people are being BBF people, why did I even bother. Oopsie my bad it won't happen again.

[mycroft]

Apologies, I didn't mean to be disrespectful. I just feel sometimes that because I am willing to explain what is, people assume I take responsibility for it, or I approve of the decisions; and sometimes I don't (but my opinion on it matters as much as anybody else's that doesn't work for BBO - i.e. almost zero). Your posts read to me like requests for me to justify the (unjustifiable) situation, and I reacted. Badly, I can see. I am sorry for that. You didn't mean the posts that way, and I can see that in rereading. Again, sorry.

I agree there are issues. I agree there are situations where luck is bad. I am sorry you got caught up in it (but less sorry that "I'm dummy on the last board, bye, partner" gets caught up in it). I think that if 90% is going to lock out people from useful tournaments for 2 months, then luck of the draw means too much (before Virtual Club Games, I didn't *have* a TCR, even though I finished 100% of the tournaments I started, because I just didn't play enough tournaments in 60 days to get a value); and I would think the answer is to lower minimum TCR for those games to something reasonable (especially if the directors of those games are themselves the ones"responsible" for the fail-to-finish as you said).

It's a tool. It might not be the right tool, and I'm sure BBO people are reviewing this thread for potential improvements. I hope, for your sake, we get them. Like all tools, even if it is the right tool, it can be used badly, and it sucks when that happens.