[fred]

The length of time a "segment" takes depends on the number of boards in that segment and how much time the tournament organizers allocate for each board.

In the Spingold, for example, segments consist of 16 boards and take roughly two and and half hours to be played.

So, for the Spingold, this question amounts to a delay of about two and a half hours (as opposed to the 30 minute delay I asked about in the previous poll).

At some point I will explain why I think this question is relevant.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[TimG]

There comes a point where one might as well wait for the tournament report or just "watch" the event through the vugraph archive. Starting the vugraph show after the segment is over (and results are available) certainly crosses that line for me.

[jdonn]

At that point it's not vugraph any more, it's a tournament report. I'd rather read about it in a book I think.

[macaw]

I love vugraph. Whenever

[NickRW]

My feeling is that we are crossing into the "vugraph would become ridiculous" territory.

Bottom line is either touranament organisers want vugraph and can handle the security issues (which seem to exist anyway, per answers in the other thread, with or without vugraph) or they really don't want it at all. And, if they don't want it, I can live without them.

Nick

[Echognome]

I don't think your poll options 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive. I feel that I can handle a 30 minute delay, but would be more inclined to watch a live event.

I think once you get until the end of the segment, then it's not really Vugraph. I can see the benefit in watching a historical match with commentary (I believe this has been done before). But it certainly doesn't have the same feel and after the segment is over, the scores are more likely to be leaked.

[mtvesuvius]

That would cross the line for me for sure, I think live is best, and a small delay would be somewhat acceptable, but this would be too much.

[cherdanno]

So at the beginning of the VuGraph broadcast of the last session, some of the players of the match would log on, or other participants of the tournament, and the result would quickly spread by rumor?
I wouldn't watch this.

[hotShot]

Watching live vugraph is best,
Usually I would not care much about a 30 min delay, if the comment was live.

I would not get up in the middle of the night to watch a vugraph live. I would not take a day of work to watch vugraph. So if I could not view a match I was interested in live, I would watch it (preferable with live comment) if offered at a more convenient time.

[mycroft]

As I have said before, a short delay - I'm talking 5-10 minutes; I wouldn't complain too much about 15 - wouldn't be a problem, provided it was a fixed delay. Compressing 2h20 of bridge into 1h30 of "play time" would destroy the feeling - no idea what parts were interesting, when they were thinking, whatever.

More than that, though, and it's not "live". Especially when the result is a major part of why people are watching, any more than two or three boards, and the cellphone(*) brigade are going to ruin it for everybody.

I had enough trouble keeping results of the latest two F1 Grands Prix out of knowledge until I had time to watch them; were I to be watching "live" rather than taped, and with 1000 other people, the chance of keeping it pure would drop to zero.

"Tournament report" or live vugraph archive, go at my own pace, with commentary as it happened, but losing the cadence of the play, is a valuable service. But it's not "live vugraph".

(*) I'm not slagging cellphones in particular; before the prevalence of leashes, I would have said the payphone brigade.

[Codo]

I would not care much about a longer delay. I want to see them play. I do not care too much about knowing the result before I saw the play.

Of course a live braodcast would be better, but just a little bit.

[nickf]

Why does it matter so that the delay is much longer?

Would you really know that it wasnt live if you werent told? The number of bridge tournaments that put results on the web not long after a session is over (let alone live) is so so few that it wouldnt be an issue. And even then the organisers could delay putting VG match results up.

What are you going to do? Phone a friend on-site to get the result rather than wait 2.5 hours?

nickf
sydney

[mycroft]

no - but people who know the result will call you, or will come in and start broadcasting it.

999 out of 1000 aren't that self-absorbed and obnoxious. There's a term for the other types. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to stop it from happening.

[Rain]

It would be nicer if "live". But if delayed is the only way we can watch vugraphs, I'll take it. Better than nothing.

[nickf]

mycroft, on Jun 26 2009, 02:59 AM, said:

no - but people who know the result will call you, or will come in and start broadcasting it.

I'd like to start another poll.

How often has a friend or acquaintance called you with breaking news that Team XXX has just won Event YYY?

Maybe it's just that no one wants to call me because my response would be and always will be zero.

nickf
sydney

[FrancesHinden]

nickf, on Jun 25 2009, 11:43 PM, said:

mycroft, on Jun 26 2009, 02:59 AM, said:

no - but people who know the result will call you, or will come in and start broadcasting it.

I'd like to start another poll.

How often has a friend or acquaintance called you with breaking news that Team XXX has just won Event YYY?

Maybe it's just that no one wants to call me because my response would be and always will be zero.

nickf
sydney

I haven't been called, but I've been emailed with updates on running scores when friends of mine are playing. The email comes to me at work from other friends* who don't work who are following it.

*Astonishing: I have enough friends that some can be playing bridge, and others can be following it....

[cherdanno]

nickf, on Jun 25 2009, 05:43 PM, said:

mycroft, on Jun 26 2009, 02:59 AM, said:

no - but people who know the result will call you, or will come in and start broadcasting it.

I'd like to start another poll.

How often has a friend or acquaintance called you with breaking news that Team XXX has just won Event YYY?

Maybe it's just that no one wants to call me because my response would be and always will be zero.

nickf
sydney

You are so very-old-fashioned. I never got a call, but have certainly gotten results of friends immediately after their session finished either via BBO chat or in a BBF post (e.g. when Justin's team beat Nickell in a KO match). And that's just me doing the pretty-old-fashioned way of communicating, young people these days would learn about it instantly via the old-fashioned text message, or the modern way of twittering.

[kfay]

The only way I'd appreciate this sort of thing is if the players themselves signed on and then commented on the match.

[nickf]

Just a straw poll....

Q. In the past few days, it seems the broadcasts of the Spingold have been starting about 30 minutes later than advertised.

How many people:

a) noticed?
b ) cared?
c) were pissed off that they werent getting the result in real time?
d) phoned a friend on site (or were SMSed or twittered) to get that vital result as soon as the last card was actually played?

Me neither.

nickf
sydney

[cherdanno]

I think it was the play that started late. The vugraph was still live.