[Bbradley62]

Partner opened 1♥ and I responded 2♦. The explanation said that I had shown 4 clubs.

[Bbradley62]

The explanation of 4m responses to 2N-3♠ (MSS) says 4-4m. Shouldn't that be 4+?

[Bbradley62]

uday, on 2010-October-14, 10:49, said:

I'm working on a filter now that will allow us to restrict these events to people who don't bail out of the middle of too many Ts. Once we get that in, we can try longer Ts ( say an hour long ) and use IMPs.

With the increase in EFAF to six times per hour, I thought I'd revisit this. Any chance of making some of the games IMPs?

[Rain]

This particular tourney type is only 6 boards. Isn't IMP going to be too swingy?

[Bbradley62]

As opposed to the randomness that exists now? I think enough players would prefer IMPs to justify making it one or two of the six hourly games.

[albertaold]

My only peeve is already mentioned. Players doing the biding have carte blanche to wreck the game. They bid real idiotic then time out the hand to get average. I have seen it where they didnt think they were going to make it and timed it out and tournament director adjusted board to give them the bid. It should be 1 min for first wait time then 20 seconds for playing time. This would stop players from wrecking the concept of these tournaments. Or maybe a reporting of players that do this so they can be blacklisted from express tournaments.

[barmar]

Every time I play one of these, I vow it will be my last. The lack of chat gives people carte blanche to do whatever they want, they don't have to worry about partner giving them a hard time about it.

[Bbradley62]

The movement appears to be something other than random. However, in the 3-table 80%TCR game finished 25 minutes ago, two players played against each other in 5 of the 6 rounds. Not surprisingly, they finished first and last.

[barmar]

An individual player can expect that to happen to him about every 1,000 3-table tourneys, if I got my math right. For it to happen to any random pair in a tourney is going to be far more common.