Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nicolas Hammond
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg,
You need to state if this at a tournament or club and if in ACBLland.

ACBL has different rules for clubs and tournaments.
Nov. 16, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More than one. Any publicity is good publicity…

Series 1
Episode 13
The Bat Jar Conjecture

Howard: Gentlemen, switching to local nerd news. Fishman, Chen, Chowdry, McNair aren’t fielding a team in the university physics bowl this year.

Leonard: You’re kidding, why not?

Howard: They formed a barbershop quartet, and got a gig playing Knotsbury Farm.

Penny: Wow, so in your world, you’re like, the cool guys.

Howard: Recognise.

Leonard: This is our year! With those guys out, the entire physics bowl will kneel before Zod.

Penny: Zod?

Howard: Kryptonian villain. Long story.

Raj: Good story. (Clasps hands to mouth in shock.)

Sheldon: Well count me out.

Howard: What? Why?

Sheldon: You want me to use my intelligence in a tawdry competition? Would you ask Picasso to play Pictionary? Would you ask Noah Webster to play Boggle? Would you ask Jacques Cousteau to play Go Fish?

Leonard: Come on, you need a four person team, we’re four people.

Sheldon: By that reasoning we should also play bridge, hold up a chuppah and enter the Olympic bobsled competition.

Penny: I want tickets to that please.

Leonard: Sheldon, what, do I need to quote Spock’s dying words to you.

Sheldon: No, don’t.

Leonard: The needs of the many.

Howard: Outweigh the needs of the few.

Sheldon: Or the one. Dammit, I’ll do it.
Nov. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the ACBL policy only applies when ACBL is the sponsor, i.e. at Nationals.

I think it is a little unclear about Regionals and Sectionals.

Our Unit has chosen, so far, not to have a policy on events that we hold. Based on discussion outside of our board meetings, we find the ACBL policy too restrictive.

I think we all understand the intent of the policy; but for as a Unit we needed something that would meet our current requirements based on current practice.

Trying to draft a well written policy is very difficult. This is one of the benefits of having a mother organization - they can write one for all of us. Or to act as a template.

The example I listed above: when a parent I've known for 3+ years asks me to watch their kid go to the bathroom because extremely difficult with a policy.

However this discussion has nothing to do with an ACBL Board Motion. It's a discussion that you need to have locally (Unit/District) and decide what is best for your organization.
Nov. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously this can be considered a shameless plug, but at the same time as a player I get very frustrated with the lack of use of appropriate technology. I probably know more about how technology can be used to help improve our game, so it's hard for me not to vent.

I ran Bridgescore+ in parallel at the regional in Augusta last week. I was only using it to start KOs and display scores for Swiss using a projector. I did try a couple more things, but when running new software you don't want to interfere with the player experience.

I have probably started 50+ KOs at this point. Now at the point where the local TDs don't even bother with a cold backup of ACBLscore when starting a KO. That was a big step, particularly for some of the TDs. The full write up of last week is at http://bsp.bridgescoreplus.com/?page_id=145

The best were the morning compact KOs. For some reason there is always a 3-5 minute lull before start time (9:00am) allowing the TD to determine the bracket size. Once they tell me that, software does the rest. We had matches and assignments up on the wall at 9:00:10, 9:00:17, 9:00:35 for the three different mornings.

On the last day, the regional had a bracketed B Swiss Teams at 10:00. There were 64 teams. First time I had tested the full Bracketed Swiss code, so I ran in parallel to test everything real-time, but did not display anything to the players. I was ready at 10:05 with table assignments, new team numbers, ready to display on the wall including handling all stationaries. Took 4 TDs until 10:21 to do the same using the old rack system.

There was comment earlier in this thread about “number of clicks/time” etc.

Rather than the example I posted about a pairs event, a bracketed Swiss may be a better example. In ACBLscore, each bracket has to be a separate event. So the TD has to repeat 8 times setting up an event for each bracket. I lost track of the number of clicks/data entries, but probably about 20-30 for each bracket/event. Then there were some errors, so they had to go through and re-do each bracket. Way too much set-up involved. Must have taken 2 TDs 5-10 minutes to do/check. Make an error, can't go back. With the new system, you set up the event, and each bracket is automatically set up. I almost wanted to give them the game file I could have created at 10:05, but that's going to need more testing before we roll it out.

Metrics are very important when looking at a new system. Got to be able to compare new with old and decide if the new is better. Any metrics that you readers can do of number of tables in KO/start time would help.

The Bracketed Swiss event brings up a very important point. With technology, 1 TD can be used to start a 64 team Swiss (I try and use a caddy for data input to Bridgescore+ - all they enter is number of points/number of players so could in theory do this event with 1 TD and 1 caddy). At this last event, we had 4 TDs needed to start the event. This has a big impact on the player experience (would have started at 10:05, not 10:21). It also has an impact on tournament finances. It would also have an impact on ACBL finances. I always used to say that ACBLscore+ would pay for itself. With 1,000 tournaments a year, cutting back on even as few as 10 TD sessions per tournament would have a huge impact on finances for units/districts/ACBL. This is a metric that no-one (to the best of my knowledge) has done.

I reviewed the ACBL reason for not wanting to deploy ACBLscore+. One of the statements was,

“We want our club and tournament directors to be able to run games
on their existing computers without expensive upgrades or
complicated new lessons.”.

We could have used the TDs Windows XP machine (those with Internet connection) to have started the event. No upgrade needed. We did need a printer ($125) and projector. I used an old mac laptop as my data entry machine. And another laptop to drive the display for the projector.

The ‘complicated new lessons’ was the interesting comment.

Effective use of technology does mean some training. Complicated? Not really. New? Certainly.

The ACBL Luddite mentality won't win out in the end.

ACBL has the software from ACBLscore+ that can be used to start a KO. They paid extra for it back in May of this year after seeing how it worked in Gatlinburg. I've obviously enhanced it quite a bit since then, added Bracketed Swiss, lots of other tweaks/improvements/performance enhancements, but they have the core code. If they choose to throw everything else away, then at a minimum the one piece they should keep and deploy is the starting a KO code.

Until they do, I'm still making this available (for free) to Districts that are interested.

Nov. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peg,

It's very complicated and probably worthy of a separate discussion somewhere. This topic started out as discussion on new ACBL Board Motions, not the current ones or current policies. So, if you want to start a separate discussion, I'd recommend that.

For ACBL it's very difficult. They have Units/Districts/Entities all working with kids/youth.

Let's define Youth as <18 (as per ACBL).

I've worked with Patty Tucker since before she started Atlanta Junior Bridge. I've taught in two different schools, worked with AJB since it started. As you know, computer security/security policy is my speciality,, particularly as it applies both to ACBL land and EU etc. I've had teachers leave me with 20+ 8-10 year old for over an hour in a school setting, because they “trust me”. I'm our current Unit (3200+ members) Past President. Our Unit is most of Georgia, including Atlanta. I wanted our Unit to adopt a Youth Policy, but both Patty and I looked at the ACBL policy and decided it was not appropriate for our Unit, so we dropped a motion to recommend it. We are still trying to work out what is best for our Unit and AJB. I was also a Cubmaster (120+ kids) for 5+ years and had to go through all the training, and even had an incident to deal with, so more familiar with most with Youth and incidents, both their impact on kids and also the possible affect on any organization. At an AJB Youth event, I'll have a parent (mom) ask me to take (watch out for) their (male) kids to the bathroom. Kids can be 6-15. Of course, I always say yes because I“m a parent too and understand their concern. That's very different from following a kid to the bathroom, but parents are rightly careful. It becomes v. difficult. The right thing is to decline to watch their kids, but what is a (mom) to do? If I say no, who do they ask? Trust is very difficult thing to acquire. One incident, and just like a ballon, gone forever. We try to organize bathroom breaks at youth events where we have someone (usually two) go to the bathroom to watch out for the kids, but it is not always possible. A break during rounds? Yuk. As a parent what do you do? Ask someone you trust?

As you know I have 3 kids that play. I take them to Nationals. I specifically point out some players and tell them never, never be anywhere X, Y, Z. Or be alone with them. Or get in an elevator with them. There may well be U, V, W, but I only know of X, Y, Z. Should I know of U, V, W, or X, Y, Z? I only know of them because of bar chat. (There may be one or 3 or 10, not telling).

But if you are a parent, and non bridge player, and don't know of U, V, W, X, Y, Z what do you do? You may have heard that there is a Z. But do you know we may also have U, V, W, X, Y?

You teach kids. One of your kids qualifies for a GNT/NAP event. Can you drive them there to help out their parents? If you are not a bridge player, or not covered by ACBL policy, sure, assuming their parents consent. But if you are covered by this policy you have to say no. So, you can't take the kids to the GNT/NAP 300 miles away, even though the parents trust you implicitly.

No policy can cover what a parent needs to do. Parents (who are not players) aren't covered. Volunteer bridge players who are, might be. It is a horribly difficult situation. There is no good answer. ACBL should have a policy. Their policy covers the events they run. Local events with local players/local volunteers are different.

Peg, I think you are covered. But it's difficult. If a parent says, ”take my child“, but the policy is ”don't ride with an adult“, what do we do?

It only takes one incident. ”We“ know of X, Y, Z. But I only know of them because of bar chat. There are probably U, V, W. But if there are P, Q, R, S, T what should we do? Don't fault ACBL or its policy. Be very careful what you vote for locally.

And please don't publish who X, Y, Z are, or might be.

It's a horrible situation. There is no answer. The legal rules in USA are different from other countries. ACBL is a multi-county organization. Publish a policy and there are legal ramifications. Belong to a Unit or District that has some $$ in their account and harder still.

I agree with all of the ACBL policy, from ACBL's perspective.

Make all your volunteers take the Boy Scouts of America Youth Protection training (see http://www.scouting.org/Training/youthprotection.aspx) and require them to give you their certificate number.

Be careful about adopting the ACBL's policy for your Unit/District/Local area. The ”good volunteers“ you want to keep, but we never know who are the ”bad volunteers" until sometimes too late. I had to deal with this very problem as a Cubmaster. It's not fun, or easy. You never know who are the abusers.
Nov. 3, 2014
Nicolas Hammond edited this comment Nov. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you offer a ride, and it's for a youth (U18), then you cannot ride in the car alone with them.

See http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/youthprotection/groupsmembers.pdf

This is causing some issues for areas that have a youth program and bridge playing volunteers. You can't offer them a free meal either. Same policy.
Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The ACBLscore license is, or at least used to be,

“This program is authorized for use only as shown and agreed on the ACBLscore
registration form.

Copyright © 1991 American Contract Bridge League. This program and, if applicable, the accompanying player information file (collectively, the ”software“) and related documentation are proprietary products of American Contract Bridge League which are protected by Copyright Laws and International Treaty. This Software and the related documentation and written material may not be decompiled, disassembled, reverse engineered, copied, transferred or incorporated into any information retrieval system, or otherwise used or reproduced without the written permission of American Contract Bridge League, except that you are allowed to make one archival/backup copy of the program and player information file.”

Having read it, I guess there is nothing in there to stop someone from reverse engineering the game file. Can't reverse engineer the program, but doesn't say anything about its data. I suspect we will very soon see a change to this license :-)
Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ACBL's interpretation is that if you create software that could extract data, you are violating the license agreement of ACBLscore (you click on this when you first install it) and thus are making/have made “unauthorized use of copyrighted ACBL materials or software”. And could now be banned for life. It's actually the creation of the software that is in breach of the license not the offer or the use (but IANAL as well).

I'm lucky. ACBL paid for the software that my company developed that did this and I have a license/agreement with ACBL giving my company rights to this software. Fortunately, my company also owns the copyright to this code.

So while me/my company should be OK, others may not.

The intent of 3.26, 3.27, 3.28 all seems reasonable. I just want everyone to be aware of how it is going to be interpreted. The possible effect is chilling, and nearly all Bridge developers in ACBL land are also players. Myself included.
Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the face of it, 3.26 makes total sense. You don't want a club manager downloading the entire ACBL member database and sending an email blast to 170,000 people in support of their favorite charity/politician/spam/you name it. That's already covered when you download the Player Information File (PIF) aka (“Member Database”) from MyACBL.

Similarly, reading the wording of 3.27 and 3.28 makes total sense.

ACBL now want to extend any legal punishments of 3.26, 3.27, 3.28 to extend to not only civil remedies, but could expel you as a member from ACBL without having to go to court.

Everything may seem reasonable so far, until you realize how ACBL will interpret and enforce 3.26, 3.27, 3.28.

As I've already received my threat from ACBL a few weeks ago (am I the only one?), I just want everyone to be aware that this new power will be used not just from the obvious misuse (email blasts), but can also be applied to any situation.

Peg: to give you an example. You take someone's picture, and they give you their name and/or ACBL player number, but not where they live. If you use the ACBL Member Database to look up where that person lives (e.g. city, state) and publish, for example, “John Smith from Winder, GA” on your web site, and cannot show where you received in writing notification from John Smith that you could publish this information then you are in violation of the current ACBL rules for the PIF (see MyACBL) and could now be banned for life from all ACBL events. You may think I'm being silly, but I've already received my threat and this motion has not even be passed yet.



Nov. 3, 2014
Nicolas Hammond edited this comment Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Item 143-01: Code of Disciplinary Regulations
has

3.26 Use of unauthorized collective member data for (a) email blasts or (b) profit in any way
or ( c ) to harass members of the ACBL.
3.27 Unauthorized use of copyrighted ACBL materials or software.
3.28 Unauthorized use of Trademarks registered by the ACBL


3.26 is designed to stop people like Chris Champion's Power Ratings, Matthew Kidd's ACBLmerge, Jay Whipple's Fast Results. It would also stop my company from, for example, making Bridgescore+ available if we charge for it. If any of us offer even as little as, say, ads on a web site around Bridge results, that is “profit in any way”. We all use “collective member data” in some way.

If a player has a bad Power Rating, that is “harassment”, Fast Results has email blasts. Any attempt to ask clubs to pay for software even with a freemium option is “profit in any way”. Technically offering any form of results is unauthorized use of collective member data.

3.27 sounds silly, but I know the intent. When you install ACBLscore, there is a message about decompiling any data. So, if you offer anything that reverse engineers the data, similar to what Matthew Kidd offers, then you will be stopped.

Before you think this is all moot, five days after I first posted on Bridgewinners, I got my first notification from ACBL threatening me with 3.27. Fortunately my company has a license for all code developed under the ACBLscore+ project so I'm not worried, and also it's not in the CDR yet, but I'm sure that this is the reason for 3.27. My company isn't affected (we don't use ACBLscore), but it would shut down everyone else that uses ACBLscore. The definition of ‘authorized use’ is up to ACBL.

If anyone was ever unclear about how valuable ‘copyright’ is (see other discussion topics), now you know.

Sadly this is all about control of data. Clubs own their results, Districts own Regionals, Units own Sectionals (all for the most part). ACBL are entitled to the data necessary to verify masterpoints etc. ACBL are trying to stop any third party entity from helping bridge players.

This motion would have a chilling effect on third party bridge products in ACBL land.

Item 143-86: Conflict of Interest Policy

(non financial interest)

This also seems targeted at Jay Whipple and his Fast Results, and possibly another board member that offers results in his local area.

Nov. 2, 2014
Nicolas Hammond edited this comment Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We will agree to disagree, but this is a very minor point in the grand scheme of things.

In both cases, both systems have started a game and are ready to accept player names and/or scores.

The point I was trying to make is that for any single screen ACBLscore may be faster (assembler routines to write to the screen, no SQL overhead, direct write to file system), but for any task Bridgescore+ should be quicker and more intuitive. In this case starting a single session, single section pair event is much faster in Bridgescore+. The example is a very common situation.

I still want to improve how Bridgescore+ starts an event, particularly a Pairs event because a single session, single section event is the most common in ACBLland for clubs. I want more defaults and to more easily create the movement for directors. What we have is good, but we can make it better.

For a club, you should be able to create defaults for which movements you prefer, and they should automatically come up. This might be a version 2.0 feature, but is easy to add. Am happy to create other videos to do comparisons between similar tasks.

Movements is something you typically do when you know bums in seats, it should not be required to start the event.
Oct. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nick does make a good point. There are lots of OS, lots of browsers. Windows XP, which is a legacy ACBLscore platform, has a default browser - IE 8 which is quite buggy and does not support all the latest gadgets. So for XP you need a different browser to run ‘modern’ code. Trying to support legacies browsers means you can't always make use of the best tools.

So you need to define a minimum platform. If XP is required, then need a current browser, e.g. Firefox. With ACBLscore+, I made it clear that we would NOT support IE 8 on XP. We can run on XP, but with Firefox (or Chrome).
Oct. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
By default, in Bridgescore+, when you create a new Pairs event, it will create a default section with 13 tables and a Mitchell movement. You can add/change later. In the video at the end there is “Section A”.

In ACBLscore, when you create a pair “event”, you typically set it up after/close to game time when you know the number of tables in each section.

In Bridgescore+, the concept is that you set up the “event” prior to game time, and then add/edit sections as needed. This means that for a second session, you can just click “Add Session” and the software knows which event. Similarly you just “Add Section” if there are more sections. Setting up an event before you know the exact number of tables per section leads to pre-registration, pre-assignment etc. etc.

I'd still like to tweak the “starting an event” code more. What it needs now is input from TDs (we have already had some), and also more importantly Club Directors (CDs). Though we as developers think it is reasonably intuitive, and certainly more so than ACBLscore, you need an iterative cycle of working with CDs in an alpha-test/beta-test cycle to make sure that you make this code as simple as possible.

Changing a default is similar to ACBLscore or any other program. Edit->Set up, Edit->Movement etc.
Oct. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've got software that will display the scores (+ assignments) through a projector on the wall. It's in use at some regionals.
Oct. 25, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the example, ACBLscore created a single section of a single event. Bridgescore+ did the same. Both were a 13 table mitchell. Neither one had name entries. Main difference, subtle though it is, is that Bridgescore+ would provide defaults. If anything goes wrong, you don't need to start again with Bridgescore+.

If you have a better comparison you'd like to see; let me know. I'll create videos of both systems.

On a per screen basis, ACBLscore will be quicker (it directly writes to the screen, can't beat that with modern computers), on a per task basis, Bridgescore+ should be faster.

More importantly, which is easier to use for a new CD (Club Director), not familiar with either. That was the target market for ACBLscore+.
Oct. 24, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Though I may be perceived as biased, refactoring wasn't really an option. The work involved to refactor was less, IMO, to re-write the code. In some ways you can argue that a re-write is a re-factor but without the baggage. For once, I will disagree with Adam.

I have the advantage of having seen the ACBLscore source. There are about 200K lines of code. Nearly all Pascal, some assembler with some screen and keyboard code.

ACBLscore is long past its sell-by date. It has done remarkably well and lasted a very long time.

The cost of finding subject matter aware (SMA) programmers, willing to work/test in Pascal and refactor the code would have been higher than a re-write.

The user interface, and business logic, are very intertwined. Trying to separate the two, which would be one step is refactoring, is a lot of work. There would be a lot of testing involved with this, using tools that do not lend themselves well to testing of large scale systems.

The database structure, which is at the heart of the ACBLscore program is complex. The game file is a hierarchical file with up to 10 levels of indirection. It works very well for a pairs game, but has no support for a team game, other than recording a win/loss. No support for an individual board etc. The game file structure is something that could be kept, and be extended to teams, but there is no inherent support within this structure of tying, say, 4 sessions of the same event, e.g. National Pairs 4 session event. Change a score from second session, you have to re-score, re-calculate carry-over, then re-import to session three then to session four. So, arguably, it was time to refactor the game file. There are over 1,000 fields in a game file (not all used). Some fields are complex with each bit indicating a different state or action to take on the file. Making small additions to the game file is fairly easy, making substantive changes to support new features is not.

There are (were) no outside tools to interact with the file structure.

The code is still DOS based. It has a Windows veneer, but was never a true Windows port.

To re-factor, and keep in Pascal, you have to decide your ultimate destination. Is it .NET/Java/Swing/Mac etc.

There are lots of “small” enhancements that had been planned for a while to ACBLscore, for example, to increase the number of strats in a pairs event from 3 to 5. That was passed by the ACBL board over 20 years ago, but the work involved to make this, what from the outside seems a relatively small change, is substantial and that's the reason it hasn't happened. Given that this is a large amount of work, you can imagine how much work a re-factoring process will be.

ACBL Board/Management requirements for new software were to run on Mac/PC and have a SQL database.

Given those as requirements (and you can certainly argue about each of them), re-factoring was not really a viable option.

I described ACBLscore as a Model T. Over the years it was modified to also be a race-car, mini-van, pick-up truck, school bus, but still had the underlying chassis. The chassis can only stand so much, and can only go so fast. It was time for a change. The replacement product has a new chassis, that is capable of supporting lots of new technologies. It is open, SQL based, web interface. Again, I'm biased, but the design is good.

Just one example: starting a 3 strat pairs event in ACBLscore takes 43 clicks/data inputs and almost 3 minutes. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZMB95bc2iI
ACBLscore+ can do this in 4 data inputs/30 seconds,
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ufahwQOmbk

I'm going to be in Providence. I plan to be at the BOG meeting, I have been at the last 9-10 BoG meetings, but I don't plan on speaking. I haven't spoken at any of the previous ones. I've stated elsewhere that for me this decision (dropping ACBLscore+) is an ACBL management decision, I'm nothing more than a member, maybe slightly more frustrated than most.

For me the good news, is that there are 6-7 districts and now some units are running score+ at tournaments. Every Unit/District that has run it, wants it for their next regional/sectional. ACBLscore+ was at the point where it was ready to be deployed and get TD feedback. I wrote a roll-out plan, see http://bsp.bridgescoreplus.com/?page_id=44

It could be that ACBL decided that the work for a roll-out was too much, or they did not have the internal resources to deliver the product. It could be that the TDs needed to learn new skills (e.g. using a projector, connecting computer to Internet) that was considered beyond them. That last sentence may sound patronizing, but it is not meant to be. Most of the support problems I have are related to standard computer “stuff” and not software related. Or it could be that the ACBL outside legal counsel advice on the copyright was enough to convince management that they could no longer develop software on which they did not hold the copyright. In which case you need not a technical team, but lawyers that can explain the difference between license/ownership/copyright - it's sadly quite complicated. I know what I believe the reason to be.

As you probably are all aware by now, my company has a license to the code. We've been working on it for some months, but it is second behind other paying work we have. I believe in the score+ code, the design, and the impact that it will have on everyone, not just TDs, but also players, results etc.. Rolling the software out at some tournaments, mostly regionals. It seems to be going well.

There's one other small point that should be made. When I run, for example, the code to start a KO, I sometimes use a caddy to do data entry (team number, # players, # MPs). We need fewer TDs to start a KO. When we run the software to help run a Swiss, we use fewer TDs. We only need 1 TD to handle the scoring/table assignment after each round; in ACBLland for larger tournaments you need 3 (one for score entry, one for assigning tables in rack, one for writing scores on chart on wall). This starts to add up fairly quickly. Fewer TDs means lower revenue for ACBL. It is more training for TDs, but overall lower revenue.

If anyone is interested, I'll probably hold a Q&A at a restaurant somewhere in Providence so can showcase Bridgescore+ and see if any Districts want to pick it up for starting KOs and running Swiss. Will send out more details closer to the event.
Oct. 24, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Take a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFmp595UdNs

Friend of mine, who is an Emmy-winning producer at a local TV station, did this several years ago (he only posted it a couple of years ago). You can see a young Andrew and Richard Jeng.

You may get some ideas on what works well on TV, and what does not.
Oct. 23, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The “is an American bridge player” is generated from the script I used.

Unless I know that they are dead, I left it that way, even those who were winning tournaments in the 1930s. Wikipedia likes confirmation that someone is dead. For some articles that Wikipedia deemed “unworthy” I did more research, typically pulling up a New York Times obituary. Added the obit., particularly from the NYT passes the Wikipedia “notable” test. If you can edit the files I have created, please do so.

I added obit. references for - B. Jay Becker, Carol Sanders, Tom Sanders, Seymon Deutsch, Robert F. Jordan, Edith Freilich, Lew Mathe, Tobias Stone, Phil Feldesman, Waldemar von Zedtwitz, Peter A. Pender. All had NY Times obits. I have now run out of my monthly free access to NY Times archives so can't do any more for a while.

If you know someone is dead, please update the Wikipedia entry for them. You do not need to be a Wikipedia editor to do this - anyone can edit. I have seen several people edit the 100+ entries created so far. The more content we can add, the better.

If you do edit someone, please put in their full name. Also there is a section at the end of the file on personal information, e.g. year died etc. If you can edit that as well. Please see my early post that starts “Update: Many thanks for everyone's help.” It has a list of things to do/check for each user that you want to edit (including changing is->was).

Generally I google the person's name, +Bridge +obituary.

If there is an article in Sports Illustrated or NYTimes or Chicago Tribune, I normally add that reference as well.

Also, check the latest file on https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries/tree/master/results
for the player. I keep updating this file, but I have to manually edit 100+ entries each time I add something new so have stopped doing this.
Oct. 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also add

Marty/Martin Fleisher. 2013 Roth lists Marty. Ever other is Martin.
Oct. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bill has “only” won 5 NABCs so I'm not going to add him to Wikipedia as probably not considered notable enough. Does not stop someone else from adding him.
Oct. 19, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top