[butterwort]

Can anything be done? I have seen players in tournaments deliberately waste time because they cannot make contract. So they get 50% average instead of a huge loss.

[paulg]

Complain to the director. If the director is working for an organisation, then complain to the organisation if the director's response is unsatisfactory. If it is a private tournament, then you always have the option of not playing in these events in the future.

[pilowsky]

butterwort, on 2020-November-16, 05:21, said:

Can anything be done? I have seen players in tournaments deliberately waste time because they cannot make contract. So they get 50% average instead of a huge loss.

You may or may not be correct.

Reasons for slow play:

• Internet outage
• perceived rudeness
• petit mal seizure
• thinking
• acute diarrhoea
• sick child
• computer reset

and on and on and on

Your reasoning is a common fallacy amongst Bridge players. It may be 'circulus in demonstrando' - you know where you want to end up, so that's where you start.
The problem that you are highlighting is not the slow player it is the inadequacy of the game of Bridge.

Bridge is the only game that permits a score of 50% to be awarded to both parties if one fails to finish.
In a way, there is something delightfully Australian about it. A real mateship flavour, Nobody left behind.

In Chess, there is a clock. If you don't finish you lose unless there is a stalemate or insufficient pieces for a win; but that's different.

[pilowsky]

edit

[jandrew]

pilowsky, on 2020-November-16, 13:22, said:

You may or may not be correct.

Reasons for slow play:

• Internet outage
• perceived rudeness
• petit mal seizure
• thinking
• acute diarrhoea
• sick child
• computer reset

and on and on and on

I find that the most effective way to prevent a pair from avoiding a bad result by playing slowly is to add time to the round. It usually only takes a couple of minutes for them to get the message, then they play the hand or leave your tournament - then subs will finish the hand (still in the name of the quitters).

[pescetom]

I found that the most effective way to prevent a pair from avoiding a bad result by playing slowly is to warn them publicly.
I say found because I only had this problem when using human subs, now that I can finally use robots I find they never stall.

[AL78]

pilowsky, on 2020-November-16, 13:22, said:

The problem that you are highlighting is not the slow player it is the inadequacy of the game of Bridge.

The problem is the slow player, and it is often because they are trundlebunnies. I know this because at my club it is always the same people, both online and at the physical club, the ones that have been playing for decades and should know better, but have never been called out so it is now hardwired and they will never change no matter what you say or do. The other reason is if the players are inexperienced* and need more time to think, which is also a factor at my club, and the director gives them some slack and will add a couple of minutes to the round if needed. That is also why we have one evening with 8 minutes a board and 18 boards in total.

*I know the people at my club well enough to know if they are inexperienced or dawdlers.

[pilowsky]

You are hitting the nail on the head and missing the point completely.
If Bridge was a timed game as every other sport is then there would be an appropriate punishment for refusing to play. Some Bridge platforms already apply this solution.
Not turning up to work results in dismissal.
Not playing causes loss by forfeiture in most sports. It's the system that's flawed not the players.
Robots won't solve the problem. Change the law to something sensible.

[Vampyr]

pilowsky, on 2020-November-16, 13:22, said:

You may or may not be correct.

Reasons for slow play:

• Internet outage
• perceived rudeness
• petit mal seizure
• thinking
• acute diarrhoea
• sick child
• computer reset

and on and on and on

Your reasoning is a common fallacy amongst Bridge players. It may be 'circulus in demonstrando' - you know where you want to end up, so that's where you start.
The problem that you are highlighting is not the slow player it is the inadequacy of the game of Bridge.

Bridge is the only game that permits a score of 50% to be awarded to both parties if one fails to finish.
In a way, there is something delightfully Australian about it. A real mateship flavour, Nobody left behind.

In Chess, there is a clock. If you don't finish you lose unless there is a stalemate or insufficient pieces for a win; but that's different.

Yes there are reasons but when someone repeatedly claims all the tricks until the round is over it was none of these. It was a free tournament so there was no redress, although I don’t see why the robot can’t assign a reasonable score.

[pilowsky]

Vampyr, on 2020-November-16, 20:20, said:

Yes there are reasons but when someone repeatedly claims all the tricks until the round is over it was none of these. It was a free tournament so there was no redress, although I don't see why the robot can't assign a reasonable score.

Are you referring to another thread?

[thepossum]

What kind of tournament. A robot one, or one involving other humans. When the robot has messed up an auction and destroyed a good tournament I have on occasions just withdrawn to save wasting my precious time. Sadly I cant get my BB$ back but at least I don't waste any more time. Occasionally to save time (if I still felt I could do ok) I have conceded all 13 tricks to save wasting time. I have also occasionally tried claiming tricks in an IMP tourney to save time. Do you have problems with any of those actions. Are they robot touneys. Do I have to worry about some sanction for not doing everything accoring to your strict rules over my behaviour?

Maybe you are talking about a different situation to me. But seriously if a robot partner has put you in a ridiculous unmakeable slam in a short tournament I am not obliged to play any more. Just because I value my time highly and you do not gives you no rights over me at all.

Also I think there are legitimate cases for people to make some kind of protest or make a point after being put in a ridiculous contract.

It reminds me, I saw a wonderful silent sit-in protest (refusal) between international teams once, to protest a dodgy bid by opps

[dsLawsd]

If a Director is available they can adjust the score or add time to the clock. If you feel you are being "gamed" you can write a player memo.

Ethically, a slow player has a duty to apologize and call the Director himself (assuming they do not have the guts to go ahead and claim down 1 etc)

Zounds! It is that devil game, Matchpoints.

At Imps in a National Championship I kibitzed a high ranking match where the Pair took 25 minutes to bid to 5NT and make it.
(There were some words, but civil)
###

[Vampyr]

pilowsky, on 2020-November-16, 20:39, said:

Are you referring to another thread?

I had mentioned it in another thread, but brought it up here when another poster suggested all kinds of reasons someone might be taking time but it is not theirs fault. I think you can tell when it is, and that the robot should assign a scre in the absence of a director.

[pilowsky]

Vampyr, on 2020-November-17, 11:09, said:

I had mentioned it in another thread, but brought it up here when another poster suggested all kinds of reasons someone might be taking time but it is not theirs fault. I think you can tell when it is, and that the robot should assign a scre in the absence of a director.

This is the point that I keep trying to make. The problem is 'object independent'. It doesn't matter at all what the reason for the slowness is. That is a complete red herring.
In the same way that Bridge players try to assign the location of the queen of spades to East or West based on facial expression or a matter of milliseconds. It's all a distraction from actual thinking.
Just introduce a Clocking mechanism to each table and a forfeiture system and the problem will go away, along with a very large number pretty silly Director calls along the lines of "my opponent scratched his nose" or "my opponent glanced at his watch" or my opponent waited 3 seconds instead of 6 seconds like he usually does" etc.
No wonder Victor Mollo made so much fun of Bridge players. It's exactly like watching animals in a zoo. His books aren't satire, they're a documentary.

[blackshoe]

dsLawsd, on 2020-November-17, 00:51, said:

Ethically, a slow player has a duty to apologize and call the Director himself

According to what ethical principles set out in the laws is this the case? Where in the laws are these principles set out?

"Do not confuse 'duty' with what others expect of you." -- Robert A. Heinlein

[pilowsky]

An excellent point, of course, the slow player may choose to litigate the matter first, using all legal options available to them. After all, it's only fair.