Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Cassel
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“after it's known how the choice will affect the result.”
The improper scale first used was for the much shorter Swiss matches the first day.
The scale applied Sunday night was a 20VP scale for matches of 28-36 boards.

Are you suggesting the DIC changed the scale so as to affect the result?
June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg,
same question as was posed to Mark:

Peg, let's say that you were the GNT Coordinator. You get a call on Monday morning demanding to know why Gupta was declared the winner when you ‘won’ both matches. The callers, and there are bunches of them, complain that there were procedural issues that would have been raised. not felt necessary the day before because they thought they'd won so the issue of opponent behavior problems was moot.

What steps would you take now?
June 21, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would this help?

the 2014-15 CoC states:
Three team round robins are two sessions of 32 boards, with one survivor. For three team round robins, the scoring is by standard ACBL quotient.

starting with the 2015-16 CoC the language has changed:
The District 22 GNT Finals are knockout team events scored by IMPs (and converted to VP’s when a team plays in a round robin.)

The seven team format was changed from 2 head to heads and one ring (RR) coming down to three to
A seven table RR using the AWL movement.

I don't think it is the role of outsiders to tell D22 that they don't know what they are doing. A conscious decision was made to NOT score the final day RR as a KO.

It's a pretty universal opinion, that present or not, the 2018-2019 GNT CoC were not clearly available online or at the playing site. It may be that the CoC were not updated. But the language that had been in place since the fall of 2015 hadn't changed.
June 21, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, you would ignore the CoC.
I can pretty much guarantee that the ACBL would not invite a team that did not win the event according to the stated CoC.

I was told has much when I pressed the issue of inviting a Bronze LM team who reached the KO phase of the Flight B GNT yet was a SF KO loser to be our district's second representative.

custom, tradition, precedent, and KOs in other district GNT finals do not trump black & white instructions in the D22 CoC. Shoulds and shouldn'ts don't overtake the rule of law, Mark.

Unjust maybe, but not a decision that can be overturned.
June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can guarantee that D22 is on it. They sent a query to our new GNT coordinator with questions about format, correction periods,and how appeals are handled.

the insinuation by Barden “ to be determined after it's known how the choice will affect the result”
in effect saying that the scale was adjusted to alter the result is outrageous.

In fact, if a continuous VP scale had an example chart instead of a formula on the page where the integer scale chart for a 30 board match was found, the ‘true winner’ might, luckily, still have prevailed.

I had a conversation this week with Keith Wells. ACBLScore does not have the formula for the continuous scale built in so that you can just plug in the length of the match and print out the continuous scale.
June 21, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AFAIK, and Special Events confirmed, the winning teams have been confirmed although many district rosters are yet to be posted online: https://live.acbl.org/special-event-roster/2018-19GNT

Pitiful is not the word I would have chosen

An injudicious, but evidently resolved result

Mark, let's say that you were the GNT Coordinator. You are informed at 10pm on Sunday by the DIC that the scale he used to assign VPs did not represent the actual match length. The DIC has recalculated and it turns out that the Gupta-Schafer match should have been a 10-10VP tie and now Gupta earned more VPs than Schafer. He updated the game files sent to the ACBL and ACBL Live now indicates that Gupta, not Schafer is the winner.

What do you do now?
June 21, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You cannot deny the D22 option to score the 3-way by converting the match imp scores to VPs.
Period.
End of controversy. D22, its intent is clear even if the language is inaccurate. Both days were RoundRobins scored by VPs.

LOL not, of course.
This chasm cannot be bridged.

If D22 had decided to score the final day using BAM scoring and crowning the team with the most board wins over the course of 60 boards the winner they could have done so.

There is no question but that the written CoC lack clarity. But the intent of running a three way by converting match imps to VPs is. And the ACBL is not in the position to come on top of a district's right to have screwy CoC. They let D22 produce a winner. They are supposed to according to both the ACBL Special conditions of contest and the D22 ‘Applicable Authority’ clause.

You can have the next/last word.
June 20, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Could the original OP have whistled by the censors and been reposted if a Ctrl-F Find and replace whoever with “Snidely Whiplash”?
June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
should've pronounced should of
June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On June 2 Keith Wells, on the original “Too Many Winners” thread posted

"if you have read the GNT Coc, then you will notice that the only phase of the event where the play conditions are described are for the National Finals. At all of the other levels (club, unit and District), the event sponsors are welcome to select any team event method they would like to use - Swiss, Knockout, Multi-phase Swiss into a KO, even Board A Match if they so desire.“

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/a-gnt-debacle-too-many-winners/?cj=812232#c812232

No amount of repetition of facts are evidently going to change your mind, nor those of a few others who refuse to understand that the sponsoring organizations are not the ACBL, they are the districts who can devise their own CoC. D22's CoC are clear that the final day, if contested between three teams, is not a KO and is not to be scored as W/L.

You may continue to assert that final authority means unfettered, but the actual language: ”the District Director (or his
designee) may on his own make decisions consistent with the spirit of these conditions of contest" belies your claim.
June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chip Boyle has made a number of statements I take issue with:

“We played youse guys head-to-head and won by 3 IMPs. But the rules say we tied. The only explanation for the result is that it emanated from California.”
The issue of the VP scale has been discussed at length. Team Schafer scored 3 more imps than Gupta. But on a 20pt integer VP scale for 30 boards each team receives 10VPs. It's one reason why a continuous VP scale is employed in many of the more serious events.

“Well, Russ, my District Director (D7), with the unfettered final authority you have given him”
The ACBL Special Conditions of Contest state The District Director has final authority on any item not specified in the conditions of contest. The D22 CoC has a section called “Applicable Authority” which gives the D22 BOD member the authority to make decisions in unforeseen circumstances "make decisions consistent with the spirit of these conditions of contest. The District Director has final authority on any item not specified in the Conditions of Contest.

Nothing about this is unfettered.

“a District Director can, with a wink and nod, turn an ACBL mandated KO scored in IMPs into a Swiss scored in VPs.” The CoC are quite clear that a three-way will convert a match score into VPs. What does winking and nodding have to do with anything? THE EVENT WAS NOT A MANDATED KO SCORED IN IMPS

After devoting over a decade and thousands of hours of volunteer time working on and promoting the GNTs, fighting for its value, and advocating for changes that could make it a more meaningful event, I'm just another poster here looking at a lot of noise having to consider the Macbeth quote about sound & fury.

I have yet to be told who comprised the the designees for David Lodge, but I have been assured that no fewer than 5 dozen emails re. the real and imagined transgressions of the weekend WERE forwarded to the group. They are the persons responsible for interpreting the spirit of the CoC and making the determination of the winning team.

Their seemingly single-minded focus on getting the match scores converted to VPs so that a winner could be finalized while ignoring other potentially “meritorious” claims (the one Boyle post with more signal than noise) was unfortunate.

The D22 decision to ‘silo’ the relevant issues of DIC actions (or lack of actions) and questionable player behavior under the guise of “no correction period” is particularly unsatisfying.

It appears that this episode is all over but the recriminations.
I wish it weren't so.
June 19, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This comment has been marked as inappropriate by the moderator(s).
June 19, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you want to discuss the GNTs and how to make the event a true Grass Roots event start a new thread.

I would start by eliminating the Open Flight.
Focus on opportunities for CLUB players to earn trips to NABCs, not experienced NABC attendees who have already drunk the KoolAid
Recalibrate the flights
Gold flight (if necessary) =3K to 6 or 7.5K
Ruby flight =1,500 to 3,000
Bronze flight =500 to 1,500
Flight C NLM 0- 500 NLM

If there were only three flights in the GNTs districts would have more resources to offer less experienced players a larger award to attend NABCs as district champions. Having enjoyed the NABC experience they will come back for more. We need strategies to get Gold Rush graduates and Bronze/Silver LMs competing and the GNTs could be a vehicle to drive participation. The bottom rung of the current Flight B GNT ladder is too difficult a climb.

The secretary will disavow any of my further excursions on this topic in this thread. And recall that I did not raise the issue of handicaps in the GNT Flight B on this thread. Yes, it relates to format…tangentially.
June 19, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Evidently there was a link, but it was broken.
As best as I can tell there was a
2015-2016
2016-2017 and
2016-2018
2018-2019 didn't appear until May 31

none of the first three had an identifiable VP scale

last night I compared my ‘unrevised’ version to the revised.
Mike Bodell had reported on this on ‘too many winners’

there were other clarifications and changes beyond the VP scale addition.

These changes were not retroactively applied to the events of the prior weekend except
The DIC applied the integer scale for the longer matches late on Sunday night because he had initially used the scale for a short Swiss match.

As I've mentioned a number of times I believe he had a responsibility, based on Law 83, because there were irregularities during the Sunday matches that could have triggered the right to appeal that were not explored because the Schafer team didn't think they needed to be.
June 19, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
GOOD G*D ALMIGHTY

You people.
Incoherent and inconsistent are not illegal
You cannot twist the arm of the ACBL to declare that the final day three-way was a KO when

the CoC clearly identify that this day long 60 board competition will be scored by VPs. They believe that the team who does the best against each of the other teams deserves to be the Open Flight champion.

D22's stated intent, one that I sought explicit clarification from John Kissinger on, is CRYSTAL CLEAR. For D22 best is NOT winning both matches. It is garnering the most VPs. The fish you keep trying to fry have disintegrated.

Even the president of the ACBL as well as Keith Wells ratify the district's right to set flawed contest conditions.
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/a-gnt-debacle-too-many-winners/?cj=812232

There are so many other substantive issues that raise concerns about the decision reached and you JUST KEEP HAMMERING AT A DEAD END ISSUE

Art,
you want to ignore me because a premise is flawed. yeah, i get it. You would crown a team that won both matches. So would I. But my premise is that the given CoC are allowable, even if flawed, and you cannot overturn the spirit of their conditions.

That is why I decried the naming of Gupta as winners… until I saw the odious language.
June 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg,

There were 14 B teams and 7 Open Flight teams that weekend.

I do not know what CoC was available onsite on May 25-26.
A CoC was linked on May 30 on the original “Too Many Winners” thread.
It caused me to change my view because it included the language about the imp to VP conversion

I have not seen a CoC doc identifying the cycle 2018-2019 that existed before the May 31 revision.

I do not see the lack of an updated CoC as grounds to abandon the key language that had been in effect going back to the 2015-2016 published CoC.

I do think there are due process issues that could reopen the adjudication.

I further believe that if Russ Jones and the ACBL was sincere in stating “The league wants what is good and fair for our members in this event” that no invitation will be extended to the D22 Open flight until they are satisfied that the rights of the Schafer team to appeal have been adequately addressed.
June 19, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Per M. Kopera's D24

Item #6 or #8 should include the prescription that the GNT flyer shall include a live link to the upcoming CoC as well as the ACBL GNT Special Conditions of Contest
June 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ira,

Maybe none of us understand why, that even with an original field of 8 or 9 teams, D22 chooses to qualify only 3 teams to the final day so that all would come away with decent MP awards and no team would finish fourth and get essentially shut out.
They could pay 4 overall places… Did anyone question why they weren't Q'ing 4 teams with and original field of 8 or 9? Aren't the contestants also responsible for helping their district have a ‘BETTER PRODUCT’

I just don't understand why so many commentators assume that their CoC are a mistake or illegal. The unique aspect of the GNTs is that there are DISTRICT OPTIONS to create conditions that are supposed to work for their contestants.

As far as I can tell this is the third year with essentially the same structure and language. Flaws have been exposed in the CoC both in clarity and completeness. I think it is understandable that the lack of an appended victory point scale was a factor in the confusion about how the second day would be scored. Why, with VP language front and center, has no one ever asked about what scale is in use?

It does bother me, however, that almost everyone wants to point fingers at everyone except the players and team captains. If you don't understand what is meant ASK. If you don't bother to ask for and review the CoC before the event isn't some of the fault your own?

Nobody, in three years, sought clarification re. converting imps to VPs?
June 18, 2019
Mike Cassel edited this comment June 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Russ,

Perhaps, but I hope not.
When an ACBL screener reviews a district's CoC perhaps they can question language that is unclear or contradictory.

I agree with Art that the primary designators:

The District 22 GNT Finals are knockout team events scored by IMPs (and converted to VP’s when a team plays in a round robin.)
The ACBL Knockout Team Conditions of Contest apply to the conduct of this event.

are statements that seem at odds with each other.
June 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Art,

Really….
Did you not state yourself that your D4 CoC had a 3-way anomaly?

REPEAT ALOUD TO YOURSELF THE FOLLOWING UNTIL IT GETS INTO YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS BECAUSE YOU AREN'T UNDERSTANDING WHAT HAS BEEN PUT UPON THESE PAGES TO READ:

The final day of the D22 GNT Open Flight was contested among three teams as a 60 board event. Thirty boards were played against each opponent. The imp score in each 30bd match was converted to VPs.
The team that performed the best by winning the most VPs in the two matches is the D22 Open Flight Championship team. IT WAS NOT A KO.

The final day of the D22 GNT Open Flight was contested among three teams as a 60 board event. Thirty boards were played against each opponent. The imp score in each 30bd match was converted to VPs.
The team that performed the best by winning the most VPs in the two matches is the D22 Open Flight Championship team. IT WAS NOT A KO.

The final day of the D22 GNT Open Flight was contested among three teams as a 60 board event. Thirty boards were played against each opponent. The imp score in each 30bd match was converted to VPs.
The team that performed the best by winning the most VPs in the two matches is the D22 Open Flight Championship team. IT WAS NOT A KO.

The final day of the D22 GNT Open Flight was contested among three teams as a 60 board event. Thirty boards were played against each opponent. The imp score in each 30bd match was converted to VPs.
The team that performed the best by winning the most VPs in the two matches is the D22 Open Flight Championship team. IT WAS NOT A KO.

Give it up, man.
June 18, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top