Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nicolas Hammond
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Update: Thank you everyone for your help with step #1. I have now done step #2. I can automatically create entries for Wikipedia. I have 269 names that have won 5 or more NABC titles, 2,387 players in total. I added some of the names last night (probably added about 30). Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Sanders

Please do NOT edit of any these recent Wikipedia entries. What is happening now is that the entries are being tagged, and I'm iteratively learning what is going to be needed to get these entries “approved”. Based on some of the auto-feedback, I am going to modify my script so that it adds external references. This will help them get “approved”. I'm also iteratively changing the links that I generate. I am going to re-run the script that generates these entries with these various improvements and plan on overwriting what is there. In other words, if you edit any page at the moment, it will get overwritten.

I also wrote a script that would take the winners for an event listed in Wikipedia, and automatically create links for all players that have 5+ wins. I'm running that script on the Winners list of NABC events as I find them.

I still need some help, the more information I can have that is in an Excel type format, the more I can automate everything. I'm going to post what I need help with on separate post so that someone can volunteer to get it done, email me (or post on Wikipedia like Alan has done), and we can cross if off the list.

After we get all that done, I will let everyone know, and you can then add the personal information for all of these players.
Oct. 16, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looks like there are about 100 players that have won 5+ NABCs that do not have a Wikipedia entry. Henry got 3/6. Not bad. #5, #6 on the list do not have a Wikipedia entry.

Ideally I was looking for an Excel spreadsheet with something like

Year|Name|Event|1or2 (place)


Additionally, need a sheet

Event|URL

mapping an Event name to the location it can be found on the Internet (not a link to another Wikipedia page)

Also

Name|WBF #



Given something like this, I can write a program that can extract all the data and put it in the format of the Wikipedia “Bridge Achievements” section that most Bridge players have. There seems to be a ‘standard’ format for Bridge players' wikipedia.

I keep getting a server error when connecting to the ACBL site. If you can post (on Wiki) a spreadsheet with the columns above, I will create the various players entries.

We can then try and get some volunteers to “clean up” the entries, add additional references (e.g. someone needs to get their WBF numbers so we can create a ‘references’ section). Someone will also need to go through the various Wikipedia entries that have player names and change them to links. That's a little bit of work. If someone wants to write a script for that (any language), let me know. Basically take a raw Wiki page, run in through a script that converts names that do not have links to names with links for all players that we are creating entries for.

There is a time gap from creating a new page on Wikipedia, to it being automatically deleted if it does not have enough references to it.

Perhaps BW isn't the best discussion site for this.
Oct. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, we can deal with which players have entries after we get the spreadsheet done. Part of the work will be going through all current entries, making sure that there are references to all their NABC/WBF wins etc. Making sure all players have references to their WBF player number etc. etc. Basically a clean-up pass. More references we have to external data, for example references to the ACBL/WBF page where their win is listed, the more likely the entry will not be deleted by Wiki-bots. It just makes sense that this is done once for all bridge players rather than someone having to re-do the work for each player that gets added.

First step is to create a list of players that should be on Wikipedia. My current arbitrary cut-off is 5 NABC wins. That seems reasonable to pass Wikipedia scrutiny for unworthy postings. Still trying to find a volunteer that is willing to create the spreadsheet. It's a few hours of work, cut/paste from various web sites.
Oct. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Probably. Someone just needs to co-ordinate it. Guess there are three parts to step 1. 1a: get the data for ACBL NABCs, 1b: get the data from WBF, 1c: Merge two parts. Once we have the list of players to add to Wikipedia, then providing a link to their WBF profile (if they have one) is part of the references step in creating a player's profile.

I did Dickie Freeman's entry 3 years ago (we were in the same Unit), and remember thinking that a lot of the work I was doing would be the same for all other players that did not have a profile yet. What I'm trying to do is find a volunteer to do steps 1a, 1b (I can do 1c).

If we cannot find someone, then I may do a couple of players manually, write-up how to do it, and see if we can find volunteers to write up other deserving players.
Oct. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The WBF YouTube videos for this event seem to be at https://www.youtube.com/user/WBFOfficial
There are some videos from Sanya so if you want to see the weather/surroundings/interviews, check it out.

It's a little confusing because there was a prior WBF YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/WorldbridgeFed

If you are going to be playing behind screens in this or any other WBF event, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UMLCkWjiNY
“I doubt if that's very clear”, but these are the new WBF rules for the tray taking ~ 20 seconds each side of the screen.


Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Someone seems to have told someone at WBF. The PDF file was fixed around 9:56pm EST today. File now has correct header. Should be no problems going forward.
Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The reasons for the decision may be a little different given the circumstances.

Donna Compton, USA 2 NPC, filed a complaint during the finals. See http://playbetterbridge.com/GermanCheatingScandal.html for her side of the story, as well as the various dates and filings.

The match was held on Saturday, September 28, 2013 and Sunday, September 29, 2013 in Bali.

A request for a monitor was requested by Donna for the Saturday match, the code was broken on Saturday, and a video was in place for Sunday's events. USA 2 filed a timely appeal. The WBF asked USA 2 to finish the match, and they would investigate.

Particularly see http://playbetterbridge.com/files/Formal_Complaint_by_USA_II.pdf

The Germans “won” the finals. They were awarded the gold medals. The USA 2 had to stand on stage next to Germany wearing their gold medals while the German national anthem was played. I happened to be there. That moment can never be re-created. I remember it well. I “re-started” playing bridge the same year Carolyn did and have followed her career since. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaQRqDYHOiE for the WBF video of the presentation of the d'Orsi medals. Take a look at the German Doctors facial expression as they walked on to the stage (compare it with their teammates), same with the USA 2 team. It's in the first 40 seconds.

The USA 2 was asked to keep quiet. More research was done at the Cavendish in Monaco in October 2013. Bertrand Gignoux provided a report from that event which also confirmed the code. It is sad that the delay took so long, and also that it affected subsequent tournaments, but due process is important also. No-one wants to be falsely accused.

I wish I had the WBF URLs, but here is a copy of the report from Dallas, March 2013 WBF meetings. See http://www.ecosoft.hu/bridge/Hearing21-22March2014.pdf or http://playbetterbridge.com/files/Hearing21-22March2014.pdf, same information.

If you want to be your own judge/jury, take a look at the video from the finals. The URLs are on Donna's web site at http://playbetterbridge.com/GermanCheatingScandal.html.
Take a look at clips 1-3, ignore 4, 5. I watched 1-3 some time ago, along with a copy of the WBF hand records. At some point, someone ought to publish a list of the coughs, who made them, the timing of the coughs with relation to the hand, the point the cough was made during the bidding. Clip 1 is 1:17:49, clip 2 is 53:06, clip 3 is 19:04. You have about 2.5 hours of video to watch. You can make your own decision. After a few boards, it became funny to predict when the cough, and the number of coughs, was going to happen. You can usually guess within a few seconds. The code regarding the “swiping of the table” before the “curtain” was dropped is also interesting. Watch the video(s). The Germans have a report, http://www.playbetterbridge.com/files/Independent_German_Committee_Findings.pdf, but it is difficult to read. The German report does have some of the timing information, but not detailed enough. If someone wants to create a simple Excel file with coughs/timings this would be helpful (Serge?). The swiping, not in Eddie's original notes, but reported elsewhere is also important. A specific time when something occurred would help anyone who doubts the evidence.

As USA 2 had formally complained during the event, and the decision that some of the German team had cheated, it is only correct that the German's gold medal was taken away. Many have pointed out that the Doctors may have cheated before, but it was only proven during the finals.

Other cheating incidents have different scenarios. In this one, Donna filed a complaint during the match, it was validated, the Germans were disqualified, USA 2 won. It is only correct that USA 2 wins the Gold Medal. One feels sorry for any other teams that may have been cheated upon, but without video it is difficult to prove.

I listened to an ACBL pro in Gatlinburg 2014 who claimed they were cheated out of various first place by previous cheaters and the impact they have had on his life (both losing out $$ in money events and also prestigious national/world titles). Cheating affects lots of people.

Someone needs to update Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_Bowl_(bridge)
Anyone can do that. It's not been updated since April 2014. I've got some other Wikipedia stuff I'd like to see done. Will post separately later this week. If you are a regular Wiki contributor, please update Wikipedia, with appropriate references (don't all do it, easier if someone who normally posts Bridge related stuff can do it so approval process is quicker - P64, newwhist are you out there?). Wikipedia needs someone to add the winners/details from 2013, as well as details from the event (still at 2011). I'd also suggest that whoever does it create a separate Wikipedia page just on the scandal from Bali 2013 along with all the appropriate references. Given the media attention, it is worthy of its own page, but whoever writes it needs to be prepared to do the proper research along with the various documents that need to be referenced. This is NOT something that WBF should be doing. WBF can post something on their web site. Wikipedia is different.

If someone in Sanya can ask WBF to provide the appropriate edits to the YouTube video. I think the video should not be removed, but have a banner added that there has been a subsequent correction. As well as WBF adding official comments to the video.

I realize that this may take time (video editing is WBF, Wikipedia is “us”), but needs to happen at some point.

Due process is very important. WBF have done the right thing. It is sad it has taken so long. Donna/Carolyn + team will never hear their national anthem for their award ceremony. Congratulations to them for following the WBF request to stay silent, to suffer through the awards ceremony knowing what happened, to wait, patiently and quietly during the appeals process. At some point WBF ought to edit their video, with a written statement of what has happened since. Somewhere Carolyn + team ought to have their own award ceremony. The same goes for the new 2nd/3rd place finishers.

World/Word/Wold Championships, ignore the puns; as well as their deserved win they should also be commended on how well the entire team has handled themselves both during and since the event. Congratulations to Carolyn + team on both the win and have well they have conducted themselves since Bali.


Oct. 13, 2014
Nicolas Hammond edited this comment Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Reason you can't access the Bul_04.pdf file….

Getting really geeky. The reason that the Bul_04.pdf does not download to your page is that has an invalid PDF header. The other Bul*.pdf have correct headers. This is something that needs to be fixed at WBF. If anyone is on site at Sanya, please pass on this message….

The header for Bul_03.pdf is a correct PDF file that starts

$ head Bul_03.pdf
%PDF-1.4
%????
1 0 obj
<<
/FunctionType 2
/Domain
/C1
/C0
/N 1
>>

The header for Bul_04.pdf is NOT a correct PDF file. It starts

$ head Bul_04.pdf
bj
120 0 obj
<<
/FirstChar 32
/Encoding 117 0 R
/Subtype/Type1
/Type/Font
/Widths
/LastChar 84


The first line should not be ‘bj’ it should be a PDF marker.

If you download the raw Bul_04.pdf file, edit the header, save it, it will then come up in a PDF reader (am looking at it now).

If I can get copyright clearance from someone at WBF, I can upload somewhere…



What this means is: until WBF re-creates the PDF file, you will not be able to display the file as a PDF image from their web site. If you have the tools yourself:

1. Download the Bul_04.pdf file as a data file. I used wget.
2. Download the Bul_03.pdf file as a data file.
3. Edit Bul_04.pdf (it is editable), change the first few lines at the top to match the Bul_03.pdf file.
4. Save Bul_04.pdf
5. Open Bul_04.pdf




Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For the longest wait of any WBF page, try http://www.worldbridge.org/repository/tourn/sanya.14/microsite/bulletins/Bul_4.pdf

Note the last is _4 and not _04. It goes into an endless loop so delete the tab after you get bored.
Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may want to consider adding a different verb if you can change the title.

Edited for context based on other edits. Gary's original title was “Lynch Team Word Champions!!”. It got changed after my post. The word Word was changed to World. I still think this is a little harsh. Perhaps we should give them a medal instead.
Oct. 13, 2014
Nicolas Hammond edited this comment Oct. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He was home schooled. He had excellent teachers. Indirect compliment to his parents. I don't know if the school is taking more applications this year. Pretty good success rate.
Oct. 12, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was fortunate enough to play with Adam back in Gatlinburg 2010. Even then he was being added to professional teams. (One pro, one client, us). It was nice to finish ahead of Meckwell/Balicki/Zmudzinski (another Adam!)/Passell in a Swiss. Adam can probably recall every card and all the mistakes I made. All I can remember is was in Tennessee some time ago.

I'm a proud parent of 3. What was, and still is, most amazing is Adam's maturity even back then. Plus, talk to him about anything other than Bridge, and you will very surprised by his overall knowledge. I strongly recommend any parent to consider sending your child to the same school he attended. Also, name your next kid Adam.

Allison is less well known in tournament circles, but certainly very well known around District 7 (we are in the same District). I've played against her, I doubt she remembers.
She is very composed, very aware of what is going on around her. A rare talent. Do not underestimate her when she comes to your table.

Again, what is most impressive about Allison is her maturity. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNGU8qwrEzk

Both are very deserving winners. This is the first time that ACBL has awarded a King and Queen of Bridge.

In addition to both being excellent Bridge players, far more importantly is their overall attitude and being great ambassadors to the sport. Both are already over-qualified to be on any Goodwill committee. Two great choices. Both will go far.
Oct. 11, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Non ACBL members do not need to read….


Not sure what clarification you need, but I'll try my best.

For reasons that will be apparent in a couple of months or so, I'll over clarify.

The ACBL Player Information File (PIF) aka “member” database, or portions thereof, is available under MyACBL according to the ACBL rules regarding electronic lists (Go to My ACBL, click on “Member Rosters”, you'll see the following)


“The list or ACBLscore Player Information file requested from ACBL is not to be used for personal or commercial use. It may be used solely for ACBL Districts, Units and Clubs to promote ACBL affiliated bridge activities.

These lists are not to be shared with any third parties. No information from these lists may be published on a web site, bulletin board or on similar resources without the express written permission of the ACBL member whose name is identified.

Violation of these rules may subject the violating party to discipline or sanctions under ACBL Rules and Regulations.”

Typically you have to be a Unit Officer, District Officer, or Club manager to get this option under “My ACBL”. For those of you who are not, disregard now.

For those that are left, it is quite important that you understand this.

For example, if you make use of the PIF, then happen to display my results at your regional or club, including, say, my city/state, then you are violating the terms under which you got the PIF. I have not given you express written permission to display my city/state on a web site. I probably gave you my name, and ACBL #, but that's it. Use anything else and you are violating ACBL's terms of use of the PIF. Publish what strat I'm in violates the agreement because you have made use of my MPs which is in the PIF and I have not given you express written permission to do that. Silly. IANAL. I don't make these rules, but I am aware of at least one district dealing with this issue at the moment.

Kevin, to clarify, it is NOT “any ACBL purpose”, it is “ACBL affiliated bridge activities”. Again, IANAL, but there is a difference. You asked for clarification. More than you wanted :-)

You may think I'm being silly, but trust me, got a reason for this.

At this point, if you host a results site and have posted anyone's city/state without everyone's written permission, you need to be considering your next option.

==

Back to your original comment.

The way ACBL tournaments work is they are incredibly good at allowing last minute entries. Even post-start entries. They will work you in (most of the time). They are trained to do this. Customer service is exemplary. . As ACBL players, we have grown to expect this type of service. Sitting behind the TD table for the last couple of years you would not believe what players expect, and how accommodating nearly all TDs are.

Yes…. ideally, ‘we’ should make use of your team's actual MPs for an event. This presumes that we have ALL the team's information before the event starts. Doesn't happen. Quite often at game time, 3 players of a team may be there, no-one knows the player number of missing player #4, but they were told he has “about 1,000 points”. Could be 800. Could be 1500. Don't know. So, when you ‘bracket’ the events as the TD you go from ‘reported masterpoints’.

Obviously, ideally, actual masterpoints. But reality is most TDs don't have all the information at start time, actually not all teams have all this information at start time.

You will see Bridgescore+ transition from ‘reported masterpoints’ to ‘actual masterpoints’. Got the code in place. First test was in Atlanta in August. But training players to get the TD that information before game time, getting all that information before game time and not affecting the start time is an interesting challenge.

The screen we present for KOs and Swiss has gone through 5 iterations. To see it, you would not know it, but getting proper feedback for everything is crucial to the long term success.

I agree that the long term solution is for everyone to pre-register, for everything to be done before start time, BUT…. ‘we’ have given our customers an expectation that is going to be very hard to change. We all want to show up one minute before game time and play. ‘We’ have taught KO players at this is how ACBL land KOs will work.

If I missed something, give me a specific question, I'll try and answer better….



Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That means getting the player information before the event starts. Er… already tested it live in Atlanta at the last Regional but not going to say any more until something is ready for release. It's surprising how many iterations of testing you have to do to learn how bridge players think. I do have a day job… so we will see when it is ready for release. For me release now means first, I'm there doing it, second it means ready for any TD (with training) to do it. There's a gap from #1 to #2. Each step involves a few iteration steps. More than you'd think.

As with everything, always a little harder than you first think. Got to allow for foreign players who do not have proper credit in the DB.

Swiss is easier to handle.

KOs are harder because of all the things that happen in real life that you would not believe.
Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Roger, you posted, “I find myself wanting more, or better, answers or revelations on the ACBL-project issues, as is my right.”. We disagree on if this “is your right”. Nothing personal. You have made some poignant comments so far on this thread. I'm just another ACBL member when I make that comment. Our “rights” are defined in our Membership agreement. You'll need to ask ACBL about who shot John. Got to be a smoking gun somewhere.
Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pete was the TC and oversaw the process but doubt he knows the details.

I brought 2 laptops, one projector, one WiFi router, one printer.

Use one laptop (old Macbook Air) to run the ACBLscore+ software. Connected via the WiFi router to a Macbook Pro. The Pro was connected to the Projector.

We did testing on Monday morning; my projector simply wasn't powerful enough, so Pete rented one from the Convention Center.

The Center then built a 7' mount over a power supply in the middle of the playing space. They mounted the projector on top of the mount. Took them 2-3 hours. I have always said that the most important thing about the projector is player safety. We spent a little time in adjusting the colors. The projector was good, powerful, but old. I think we ended up projecting yellow font - it was the most readable from a distance.

As teams entered, the TD entered the information into ACBLscore. I entered the same information into ACBLscore+ and the entry information was displayed on the projector through ACBLscore+. After the last entry was sold, the TD used ACBLscore+ to bracket (decide where the bracket divisions were), to match (randomly assign teams to each other in the bracket), then table (assign teams to brackets). Once that was done, we printed the information on to the cheap, fast laser printer ($125) I brought. We did this so that there was always a hard copy in case anything went wrong.

There was a lot of checking/double checking that information in ACBLscore matched ACBLscore+. Unfortunately, back then, most of this was manual. It's now automatic. The error rate for teams entering information is about 5% (i.e. about 1 in 20 teams comes back and gives a correction for the number of MPs on their team, or adds a player). The TD error rate (how often the TD mistypes a number) is less than 1%. The good news with a projector is that the last error gets fixed quickly because a team comes and complains.

Once we had a hard copy of the brackets, we would then “publish”, i.e. display the information on the wall. We did not “publish” until we had hard copy.

All the projection came through ACBLscore+ (as it was then called).

Once the event started, the TDs used ACBLscore to “run” the event.

Running the ACBLscore+ software was something I did, on a couple of occasions the TD ran the software, but these are ACBL employees. Not sure they are allowed to post. I'd give you my review of the software, but it is likely to be a little biased.

We didn't always run the software. Basically if I was playing, we tried not to run it because if anything goes wrong, I needed to be available just in case. (For example, after everyone is playing a team discovers that they are in the wrong bracket because someone read 8000 as 3000 when adding a player to their team - the fix for this is manual - have to move several teams - in this case 5 brackets were affected. TDs are used to this manually, but the information they were used to seeing was different. Based on that one occurrence, I added a lot more information to the printed bracket sheets so that the TDs can fix something manually a lot quicker). Mistakes to happen, TDs are v. good at fixing most of them, providing they have the right tools.

I've previously posted the metrics. One of the issues with new software is “is it really better”. Having metrics is a very important tools. I took a few metrics in 2013 so that we could test in 2014. For example, lot of testing in 2013 to determine the footprint of a WiFi router.
Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've posted previously, business ethics prevents me from disclosing too much about the Hammond Software (HS)/ACBL ACBLscore+ contract. My current role is to protect my company's reputation, and to minimize our legal costs - other posts have led to polls on threats to sue my company. If ACBL chooses to release information about the contract and the work, I can't stop them. But at the same time, if there is mis-information I will probably try and correct it. I do not plan on being the first to release some information.

BW probably isn't the place to be having this discussion, but they started this chain. At some point, there's going to be enough information on this one thread for someone to write a book…

Bit of background because there is a lot of very careful linguistics going on.

The ACBLscore+ _contract_ was between Hammond Software and ACBL.

The ACBLscore+ _project_ included the work for the contract AND a lot of work that ACBL was going to do to be able to implement the code from the contract.

Even on some presentations to the BOD there was often confusion between the two words, and thinking that ONLY the work from the _contract_ was necessary to complete the _project_. Absolutely not. Lot more work to do the project than just the contract. That part of the work was outside the scope of the contract and was not HS responsibility.

There has been some very careful use of those two different word with some of the postings.

That being said…

I posted this on another thread:

In the middle of January 2014, I sent an 11 page letter to Robert Hartman (ACBL CEO). It was not a surprise, he had been forewarned it was coming. Basically it was listing “uncured material breach” of the contract which was a reason for Hammond Software (HS) to terminate the contract. It put ACBL on a 30 day notice, and then gave them an additional 30 days to cure. After 60 days, still not cured, so we set a termination date of March 31, 2014. Our final invoice went out at the end of March. There was still money left in the contract.

ACBL may have been worried that HS was going to sue ACBL for the remainder of the money in the contract. Never our intent.

We continued to work on the code, remember we were in negotiations for a new contract, but renegotiating the copyright from the original contract and ACBL now wanting to own and control any derivative work that HS may create from the original code, no matter the industry, no matter the time frame were non-negotiable items. So we agreed that there would be no new contract. We each wished the other well. No hard feelings.

To address the specific comments in Phyllis' email:

“The determination to terminate the contract was made after much study and with the best interests of all our members as the determining factor in the decision to halt the program.The determination to terminate the contract was made after much study and with the best interests of all our members as the determining factor in the decision to halt the program.”

The contract was terminated in March, or May, of this year. The “contract” and the “program” are two different things. The contract was delivered on time, under budget, but we could not deliver anything that had a 3 month of longer documented delay, or anything dependent on a delayed item.

" … an outside consultant …“

It was a company, not a consultant, though I understand most people may not know the difference or care.

”The Agreement provided for six specific milestones to be completed and tested by the consultant within stated time frames and for stated fees.“

There were six separate phases, three separate milestones, to use the wording in the contract. I think Phyllis meant Phase, not milestone. The Phases were to be completed by HS, but tested by ACBL. Really don't think we would be allowed to test our own code do you? The contract also had 4 deliverables but that is going to confuse everyone…

ACBL could fire HS if we failed to meet with the time line or $$ cost of any phase. ACBL were going to get to keep any time or $$ saved, i.e. if we delivered a phase early and under budget, ACBL kept the difference. And we did deliver some under time and under budget. Actually ACBL could have fired HS after the completion of any Phase, even if delivered on time and on budget without cause, 15 days written notice was all it would take.

”During August, 2013, the fourth milestone time frame was missed by the consultant“

100% correct. What Phyllis fails to mention is the reason. Phase 4 had multiple deliverables (10?). ACBL failed to deliver some of the documentation and specs required for HS to meet Phase 4. In fact, some of these were never delivered even by the end of the contract and had impact on other deliverables. Can't write code when we don't have the specs. In other words, be careful where the blame is assigned. I know what the original wording implied.

”Then in February, 2014, it was determined by ACBL management that the project was further behind in completing several of the milestones“

This was after the January 16th letter to ACBL that put them on notice that there were ”material breaches“ that would ”excuse further performance“. At that time I assume that the CEO did the necessary research to investigate and attempt to mitigate the material breaches. Note that the wording is the project, not the contract. It does get confusing. In the ACBL/HS Contract there are ”Phases“, it is certainly possible that the internal ACBLscore+ Project had ”Milestones“. I don't know.

”despite payment of the entire $1.4 million consulting fee to the consultant“.

Not true. As of the first end of the contract (March), we were under budget.

”The advisory group unanimously recommended that the ACBLscore+ Agreement be immediately terminated and the program halted because: (1) the Personal Web Server concept was too difficult to install and ensure functionality; (2) The software did not meet ACBL expectations for responsiveness and usability; (3) the software was largely incomplete and untested; and (4) user interface was completely foreign, and would require a significant investment for user training.“

The Agreement (contract) was first terminated at the end of March. Not by ACBL.

(1)..(4) are subjective. You are welcome to take a look at the Bridgescore+ YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqeXxu-6NajvVDe0D467dhw and judge for yourself. (1) is not shown. For (2), I still have some videos that are in developer mode, at some point I'll re-do them in production mode. I normally make a comment in the audio on the video because developer mode does run slower. Ironically I typically run in developer mode at tournaments because it is easier and fast enough. This is the mode used in Gatlinburg and Atlanta. There are some performance videos on the site. See comparison between starting a 3 start pairs event in ACBLscore and Bridgescore+. You can decide on usability issues. Should be enough information on the videos to judge performance. Gatlinburg has the biggest tournament event on the ACBL calendar. Ran it there.

(4) was deliberately by design. No-one wanted to keep the old interface. ACBL already had one failed attempt to do that. The goal was to design for a club director/TD starting 5 years from now, i.e. someone with no baggage from ACBLscore. Some of the screens are currently designed to be transitional, I've written about some of the interesting things that you only discover when you run live and how we make them transitional. But the goal was to make it more friendly and user for Club Directors to learn. Only thing I can say is find a new Club Director and compare ACBLscore and Bridgescore+.

”In April, 2014, the Agreement was, in fact terminated. terminated.“

It was either March, or May, see prior discussion.

“ownership of the domain shall reside with the ACBL.”

this is a cut/paste from a sentence in the contract that was missing a word, better read as

“ownership of the domain shall reside with the ACBL.“

No big deal. I registered some domains, e.g. acblscoreplus.com. We added that wording to make sure that we did not run off with the domain in hopes that ACBL would make sure they used similar language in future technical contracts. You don't want the developer owning the domain name(s) when it is all done. This was wording we added(!)

” shall be provided with a free license-to-use and free license-to-distribute for all code developed during this project.”

No, we are not going to make it Open Source. Don't ask.

If ACBL and its committee thinks it is no good, fine. Everyone entitled to their own opinion. If ACBL won't use it, fine. Doesn't stop us. We've already committed to some districts to run it at some regionals, I have no problem running it. I obviously have a different opinion than the ACBL committee on the software. Won't be the first time. Doubt it will be the last. We agree to disagree. All we are running at the moment is software to help start a KO. Can also display all results/assignments from a Swiss on the wall. Simple stuff.

So… Bridgescore+. Same price as ACBLscore. Let the market decide. It would really help if ACBL would release the specs needed to complete the project. It is something that would be useful for all members, not just developers - an HTML page that lists all of ACBL's masterpoint eligibility and assignment rules in a single place (not the calculation rules). Sounds simple, but it is the only place the word “complex” is used for a component of a Phase.

“Had the ACBLscore+ program been completed and published, the ACBL would have obtained copyright protection by using the copyright symbol and terms of use language similar to those developed by outside copyright counsel for the recently published “Learn to Play Bridge” program. Since ACBLscore+ was not completed or fully tested or published, the copyright symbol and terms of use language could not be integrated into the final program”.

IANAL, but others have pointed out the legal issues. Complicated, but HS would have been listed at the copyright owner is what I've been told. It turns out this is now a really big deal for ACBL. Since day one, all the code has had a copyright embedded in it. Developer 101 stuff. This Copyright issue has been huge for ACBL since mid last year. Perhaps because of lessons learned from L2PB, I'm speculating. My lawyer is still confused on why.

I think Bridegscore+ uses about 70 different products so the License agreement lists all of those license agreements. Quite a complicated page… All of the other License agreements are MIT-License of similar, i.e. free to use, free to distribute.

The wording of the “terms of use” was requested from ACBL legal department on September 7, 2013 with a ‘need’ date of 4-5 weeks as we planned to release to clubs. As of the end of the contract the “terms of use” document was never delivered so there was no alpha release to clubs.

Roger wrote: “I find myself wanting more, or better, answers or revelations on the ACBL-project issues, as is my right.”

No, it's not. Sorry. Sounds like you are an ACBL member, just like me. We all vote for, and empower the Board, and implicitly the management to run the organization for us. But we are not entitled to every piece of possible information. I've only released something after ACBL has released it. I didn't post on the original ACBLscore thread, I only posted on this thread after some time. The only reason I'm posting is to keep the company's legal bills down. This contract finished six months ago and our lawyer is very happy.

I will repeat again: HS has no intention and never has had any intention to sure ACBL. Not sure how or where that rumor started. No idea what we would sue for.

My “two hats” is sometimes I post for me, sometimes for my company. I think it's obvious when I do each one. The Medieval Fonts for example was personal, same as the Open Source mapping to a bridge hand.
Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've got some tools that I will probably release in the next version of Bridgescore+ that will help. Can go from hand records to Word etc. Still looking for more templates, but that comment won't make any sense until I release the code so you can see what I'm talking about.

My frustration is still with the on-line hand records (not the PDF). I get a little sea-sick reading them!
Oct. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Took some time, but I may have figured out why the ACBL BOD was/is on a gag order.

In the middle of January 2014, I sent an 11 page letter to Robert Hartman (ACBL CEO). It was not a surprise, he had been forewarned it was coming. Basically it was listing "uncured material breach" of the contract which was a reason for Hammond Software (HS) to terminate the contract. It put ACBL on a 30 day notice, and then gave them an additional 30 days to cure. After 60 days, still not cured, so we set a termination date of March 31, 2014. Our final invoice went out at the end of March. There was still money left in the contract.

ACBL may have been worried that HS was going to sue ACBL for the remainder of the money in the contract. Never our intent.

We continued to work on the code, remember we were in negotiations for a new contract, but renegotiating the copyright from the original contract and ACBL's now wanting to own and control any derivative work that HS may create from the original code, no matter the industry, no matter the time frame were non-negotiable items. So we agreed that there would be no new contract. We each wished the other well.

ACBL then wanted the code that was shown in Gatlinburg, so we changed the contract end date, shipped them the code and invoiced them. Now, no money to sue about.


Oct. 7, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top