Backgammon Online

04-Oct-2020
14:58 PDT

Yes, the majority of players are playing fast as was asked. However, there are some slow players out there. I mentioned this before and I'll do it again - one way to deal with this is to identify the slowest players and ban them from the next tournament.
An example would be to count unfinished games after a certain time, e.g. 7 days from the tournament start. Of course, if the worst offenders have 1-2 unfinished games it's not a problem, but if they have more than 5 then we have a problem.

Using current tournament as an example, after 8 days of playing the "leaders" in unfinished games are:
isnogood & Rio1962- 7 games
Mariusadi, 2johnny, slimshadey - 6 games.

04-Oct-2020
18:12 PDT

To implement Blokhin2's suggestion, we would need to count the tournament duration from the advertised start date, not 5 days earlier. The earlier start may help some people with limited games get through their allocated number of games. It would also be less of an issue if we had smaller groups (eg. four 8-player groups).

Also, we would need to tighten up the Code of Conduct. It currently asks us to make 1-2 moves each day. If games average about 25 turns, then we are looking at games taking 12-25 days, if the players follow the guidelines. To finish within 7 days, the guideline should be 4-5 moves each day.

Either the Rules or Code should state that all games are to have the minimum Time Per Turn of 2 days.

Finally, there should be required game settings listed in the Code of Conduct. I suggest:
- Backgammon Game Priority: Least Time Left to Move
- Automatic Dice Rolls: On
- Backgammon Forced Turns: On

04-Oct-2020
23:47 PDT

2Johnny von Esprit (27.09)

There is only "0" for Esprit, and missing "1" for 2Johnny
Please fill "1" in cell 2Johnny-Esprit.

Thank you,
R.

05-Oct-2020
02:11 PDT

* I still can't figure out how we can control the speed of the game except with "honestly word". The only thing that comes to my mind is a speed bonus and vice versa - a penalty for delay. But this is quite delicate to precising  

** Group of 16 players is too big and in my opinion.
(I think 4 groups of 8 players was optimal in this case.)

2 groups - if all players are less 20 (S<20); current format - Playoffs (the 4 the best of 2 groups)
3 groups - if all players are less 32 (20<=S<32); format - Playoffs (exampl. the 2 the best of 3 groups + 2 fastest form all members)
4 groups - if all players are less 40 (32<=S<=40); similar format - Playoffs (the 2 the best of 4 groups)
More than 40 - need totally different format maybe.

*** The settings that Gem gives are appropriate. I agree (btw they are mine   )

05-Oct-2020
15:20 PDT

First of all I would like to mention how very pleased I am with this fast tournament. I am perfectly fine with groups of 16 players and posting my results on the BBL website. I find it a great improvement that rules are kept to a minimum that there is no more waiting until the opponent finally challenges you.
I also understand from the NT-Forum that one BBL2 player is playing dead slow so that his opponent really got bored and annoyed.

So at BBL2 this new tournament is already put to a test at its core. As almost all participants have finished their games a couple of days ago, the quarter finals could have started today, if not a few players made the group wait for no significant reasons.

Therefore, I would like to make the following suggestion:
All games which finish after the 10th of the month will be disqualified to maintain the Blitz character of this tournament. The player who is responsible for the delay will receive 0 points and the victory point will go to the opponent. This will create the structure that quarter finals can start on the 10th of each month.

What do you think ?  

05-Oct-2020
15:38 PDT

Is it always clear which player is causing the delays? I have no problem disqualifying the cause of the delay if it is known.

05-Oct-2020
16:15 PDT

Looking at the clear format of the results list on the BBL website, it is rather obvious how fast participants play.
And of course, something unexpected can always happen, but I believe we all are old enough to inform the host, when this occurs, like itisme has demonstrated.

06-Oct-2020
07:38 PDT

Someone just added five entries to our BBL website results form with just one word “won”
Unfortunately, I have no way to know who submitted these entries and how to log them.
All results should be submitted in the format: Player A - Player B 1:0, Gammon (if applicable), otherwise I would not be able to count them.

If anyone is having any issues posting results, please send me a message and I will be more than happy to post it for you.

07-Oct-2020
17:06 PDT

I am wondering how the 4-way tie in group 1 for 3rd and 4th place will be settled. Does the existing rule cover this case? Maybe they are already playing more games?

07-Oct-2020
17:11 PDT

here is what we have on our website for the tiebreakers:

Tiebreakers: When more than one player has the same number of victories in the tournament, the one who has the advantage in the face-to-face game(s) between these players has the tiebreaker. If the face-to-face game results cannot determine the winner, the player with the greater number of victories by gammons has the tiebreaker. Next, the player with the lowest number of losses by gammons will have the tiebreaker. Finally, if no tiebreaker rules allowed to declare the winner for the playoff seedings an extra playoff BG game will be set to break the tie. For any non-playoff placements, the group place will be declared as shared.

I am in process of validating wins with gammons.