[halcyon]

Are Arrow switches compulsory with 1 winner Mitchels. Can find nothing in various regs to this,I know attitude has changed,(frequently!0 over the years.

[mjj29]

If you don't, then the EW and NS pairs aren't comparable - they are completely separate fields with no comparisons between them. I don't know whether the NBO (presumably ACBL) regulations actually require it, but reporting a single set of results for a non-arrow-switched mitchell is nonsense.

[Mbodell]

In the ACBL it is not uncommon to have "Overall results" in one session games that compare a separate E/W field to the N/S field and the highest percentage wins across both fields. So N/S 1 at 58% might well be 3rd overall because two E/W pairs had 60+% scores.

[blackshoe]

Folks in the ACBL do a lot of things that don't make any rational sense. As for "Overalls", I've seen club TDs here complain "the overalls weren't printed" on the results, and then simply mash buttons until the computer coughs up. IOW, they don't have a clue what they're doing, they just know people like it when they get more monster points.

[bluejak]

When I played in one winner Mitchells in the late 1960s they were arrow-switched, and always have been ever since. Are you talking pre late 1960s, or perhaps the ACBL?

Joking aside, we try to teach people good practice here. Good practice has never been to have a single session Mitchell with one winner and no arrow-switch. No doubt there have been a number of Mitchells over the years that do not conform to good practice.

[Vampyr]

A few years ago I played in a club duplicate in the US. There were 12 1/2 tables with a rover.

The director had decided that instead of displacing the N/S pairs for the 2 boards in a round, they would replace the NS pair for one board ans the EW pair for the other. I thought that this was very strange, but I was pleasantly surprised that the ACBL were implementing sinlge-winner games.

But it was not to be. There was no arrow-switch. That afternoon, overall results were derived from three completely separate fields -- NS, EW, and the two ladies who sat in both directions.

[Siegmund]

I do know of at least one ACBL club that arrow-switches its Mitchell movements (because with between 8 and 14 tables, you can give more masterpoints in a club game that way, not so much because of perfection of movement. If it were me and I wanted the extra points, I'd run a 13-round 3/4 movement with 8 or 9 tables...)

More commonly, large club games are straight mitchells with no overall awards; only special events and sectional+ tournaments regularly combine across sections (more than 1 NS and more than 1 EW all lumped together) for overall awards.

[blackshoe]

Our local Tuesday afternoon game is usually 3 sections, with "overalls". Last Tuesday was typical:

Section A: NS: A - 5 pairs, X - 1 pair, B - 4 pairs; EW: A - 4 pairs, X - 2 pairs, B - 4 pairs.
Section B: NS: B - 5 pairs, C - 4 pairs; EW: B - 7 pairs, C - 2 pairs.
Section D: NS: B - 3 pairs, C - 5 pairs; EW: B - 3 pairs; C - 5 pairs.

There was no section C.

I have no idea where the strata were divided, or if the strata in sections B and D were divided at the same place, or where the B stratum in section A fits in. I also have no idea how the TD would explain why she did it this way, unless it's "because I felt like it".

Note: the movement in all three cases was a two-winner (in the sections) Mitchell. The overalls were one-winner.

[campboy]

Of course you can run a Mitchell with or without arrow-switches; the question is simply what you do with the results. I think the right place to look is the masterpoint regulations. These will presumably have different award schemes for two-winner and one-winner movements, and may tell you what the difference is.

For example, in the EBU I believe it is a breach of regulations to issue masterpoints for an unswitched Mitchell as though it were a one-winner movement, since the masterpoint handbook says

4.1.4 said:

For a pairs event, this may be a "single-winner" movement (ie a Howell or a Scrambled Mitchell) or a "two-winner" movement (ie Mitchell-type movement, with a NS and EW winner).

[blackshoe]

As far as I can tell, the ACBL masterpoint regulations don't say word one about this.

As near as I can figure, when ACBLScore computes overall scores, it treats the group of players it's given as having played a one-winner movement, even if they haven't, and computes a single overall winner in each stratum, plus second, third (and so on) places down as far as the masterpoint regs allow awarding of any masterpoints at all (i.e., 40% of the field get points). Also as near as I can figure, ACBL treats just about anything ACBLScore does as legal. Apparently they feel they don't need a regulation to cover - the fact that the ACBL BoD approved the use of the program (so the folks at HQ say, anyway) is sufficient.

[suprgrover]

blackshoe, on 2011-February-17, 10:09, said:

As far as I can tell, the ACBL masterpoint regulations don't say word one about this.

As near as I can figure, when ACBLScore computes overall scores, it treats the group of players it's given as having played a one-winner movement, even if they haven't, and computes a single overall winner in each stratum, plus second, third (and so on) places down as far as the masterpoint regs allow awarding of any masterpoints at all (i.e., 40% of the field get points). Also as near as I can figure, ACBL treats just about anything ACBLScore does as legal. Apparently they feel they don't need a regulation to cover - the fact that the ACBL BoD approved the use of the program (so the folks at HQ say, anyway) is sufficient.

The section awards are made to the 40% of the field. Overall awards go to fewer places via a complicated formula (2 places for 3 tables; 3 places for 4 tables; 4 places for 5-6 tables; 5 places for 7-9 tables; 6 places for 10 to some sifnificantly large number of tables) and only apply to ordinary club masterpoint games if there are 16 or more tables overall.

[McBruce]

In our Unit Championship games I ran arrow switches in pair games from the time I was appointed TD, three years ago. Realizing that ACBL players are unfamiliar with them (except those who had played in club games I ran), I made sure to fill out the arrow switch round pickup slips in advance, and explained the procedure as best I could so that everyone became familiar with it and it became fairly commonplace after a short time. Sadly, the local Unit Board decided to conduct a simple poll on the use of the arrow switch, and the players voted it down. The players that were most vociferous against it tended to make some inaccurate and disparaging comment to me as they passed the scoring area on their way out (because they were not interested in hearing a response). Here is an example of the abuse I would get:

--"we got deprived of our two slams in the last round by your stupid arrow switch"
--"the arrow switch cost us a N-S section top when we were suddenly compared against the E-W pairs." (This pair scored 22% on three boards in the last round with the arrow switch and of course feels that they would have crushed their opponents with the other cards. The masterpoints they got for third overall was more than first in a section half the size of the field would have paid.)
--"you know it's not fair and you're doing it anyway"
--"nobody anywhere in the world does this, you're the only one"
--"it always gives out fewer masterpoints" or "fewer pairs win masterpoints"
--"people will not come back if you continue to impose this silliness on us"

At the same time, every novice pair who asked me questions about it were happy to hear what the benefits were.

Those that did complain virtually always had had a sub-par game. The same players had very little to say when they were having a good game. The game slowly increased attendance, gaining about a table per game each year.

I have replied to the Unit President asking what the Board will do when the players demand polls on travelers vs pickups, skipping a table to avoid seeing boards twice, and giving no matchpoints for a score that loses by only 10. The Unit President was less than amused.

[blackshoe]

Put a large bowl next to the signup desk. As the players buy their entries, put blank slips of paper in the bowl. Once you have all the entries, figure out how many will win monster points. Take that many slips out, and write a place number (1 to whatever) on them, then put them back. Ask a representative of each pair to come and pick a slip at random from the bowl. When all have chosen, announce the winners, and tell everyone they're welcome to stay and play cards if they'd like, or they can go home or to a movie or something.

Sheesh.