[bobby_o]

One of our regular players has a bad habit of not self-alerting, to the point that I am ready to assign procedural penalties if it continues. How can I do this on BBO?

Thanks!

[barmar]

Sorry, we don't have this ability. You can give them Average minus, but then you have to give the opponents Average or Average Plus, we don't have the ability to give a real score to one pair and artificial score to the other.

[Vampyr]

 barmar, on 2020-May-02, 20:31, said:

Sorry, we don't have this ability. You can give them Average minus, but then you have to give the opponents Average or Average Plus, we don't have the ability to give a real score to one pair and artificial score to the other.

This will, in many cases, not be legal. An artificial assigned score is only permitted as a last resort when a “real” assigned score is, for some reason, not possible.

And how do you do weighted scores, which are also required by law?

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2020-May-02, 20:31, said:

Sorry, we don't have this ability. You can give them Average minus, but then you have to give the opponents Average or Average Plus, we don't have the ability to give a real score to one pair and artificial score to the other.

I ran into this today. I had a pair who were consistently slow despite multiple warnings and ruined the tournament for others, but I could not see how to assign a penalty (even though I had told them I would do so).
So this basic function is absent even if I were to revert to the obsolete Flash client?

[barmar]

 Vampyr, on 2020-May-02, 23:43, said:

This will, in many cases, not be legal. An artificial assigned score is only permitted as a last resort when a “real” assigned score is, for some reason, not possible.

And how do you do weighted scores, which are also required by law?

We don't.

We could fill a book with all the things that the Laws require that we don't support. BBO was designed for more casual play, rigid adherence to the Laws was not a priority. And we have bigger fish to fry right now just trying to accomodate the load.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2020-May-04, 11:20, said:

We don't.

We could fill a book with all the things that the Laws require that we don't support. BBO was designed for more casual play, rigid adherence to the Laws was not a priority. And we have bigger fish to fry right now just trying to accomodate the load.

Fair enough for many legal aspects, but being able to assign a penalty is essential and also simple to implement.

If the Director is only there to keep the seats full then you could have just automated the insertion of robots and choice of number of rounds and saved many people hours of thankless and rather pointless work.

Please do put it near top of the list post-load, it shouldn't take long.

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2020-May-04, 13:13, said:

Fair enough for many legal aspects, but being able to assign a penalty is essential and also simple to implement.

Why do people who have no idea how the system is designed feel they can say what's "easy"?

We only have one field for the result of a board, not a separate field for each side. It can either hold a bridge result like 4SS= or it can contain an artificial score. Artificial scores begin with A and followed a character for each side: = for Average, + for Average-Plus, - for Average-Minus.

Changing this to store separate results for each side, or adding another field to hold penalties, would require changes all over the place.

[McBruce]

 barmar, on 2020-May-05, 07:28, said:

Why do people who have no idea how the system is designed feel they can say what's "easy"?

We only have one field for the result of a board, not a separate field for each side. It can either hold a bridge result like 4SS= or it can contain an artificial score. Artificial scores begin with A and followed a character for each side: = for Average, + for Average-Plus, - for Average-Minus.

Changing this to store separate results for each side, or adding another field to hold penalties, would require changes all over the place.

I don't think the request is for a board-level penalty. Rather, it is for what in ACBLscore we use the command ADJ: a simple adding or subtracting of a number of matchpoints to the overall score of a pair or multiple pairs. Enter a player name and a +/- number to add to their final score. Perhaps the system would remind the TD what top on a board is in the dialog box. It would be useful for all sorts of purposes -- I've used it to adjust artificial averages to the exact matchpoints computed by a weighted score in a two-session sectional open pairs where we had a photo finish and a difficult ruling in the final round, for example. More common would be to assign a standard penalty to a pair for a procedural penalty. You might have to use it multiple times and add adjustments together, in a rare case, but still only one extra field would be needed per entry, not per board.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2020-May-05, 07:28, said:

Why do people who have no idea how the system is designed feel they can say what's "easy"?

A few decades of designing and implementing more complex systems and an understanding of the scoring of bridge ?

Fair enough if nobody asked for this feature before, but unless there is something badly wrong with the design this has to be simple.
We are not asking for split scores, if that is what you were thinking.
It has nothing to do with single boards, just tournament scoring.
For a given pair (or individual, or multiple pairs, according to type of tournament) the TD can detract (one or more times) a number of MP/IMP (or some percentage of the average total of the same) from their total score in the tournament.
It would be nice if they were also advised that this has happened and the reason ascribed by TD.

[vABF6778]

What does ASS mean compared with the other average scores such as A+, A- etc

[barmar]

 vABF6778, on 2020-May-07, 17:57, said:

What does ASS mean compared with the other average scores such as A+, A- etc

S stands for Sitout.