[polecat69]

We had a bridge session yesterday which started with thirteen and a half tables and a north/south sitout. After two rounds, one of the east/west players was taken ill and had to leave.

Is there any lawful way in which the Mitchell skip movement could have been modified at this stage to eliminate the need for both a N/S and an E/W pairs having to sit out for the rest of the session?

[blackshoe]

I'm sure there is, but either it's more complicated than my poor brain can deal with right now, or it's less complicated and I'm missing something. I'll have to think about it.

[pran]

I doubt that it is possible in Mitchell or Howell schedules because the two pairs with simultaneous sitouts in any round will not have the same boards "available" for play in their respective schedules.

You will (probably) need to reschedule the entire session (including the rounds that have already been completed before the second sitout).

[bluejak]

I have never known anyone even try it. In the very rare occasion when it happens, you just explain to the customers that it's life. Even the surly unfriendly ones generally accept illness as an excuse.

[blackshoe]

Yeah, I had about come to the conclusions that Sven and David suggest. Otherwise it's quite a mess.

I wonder if there's a movement around that would have made it easier, or at least possible.

[axman]

polecat69, on 2012-February-11, 10:56, said:

We had a bridge session yesterday which started with thirteen and a half tables and a north/south sitout. After two rounds, one of the east/west players was taken ill and had to leave.

Is there any lawful way in which the Mitchell skip movement could have been modified at this stage to eliminate the need for both a N/S and an E/W pairs having to sit out for the rest of the session?

It's possible there is someone that is available immediately to fill in. And there is the possibility that someone [pair] can be called in- even if it takes 30-40 minutes. You may lose some comparisons, but players appreciate playing boards rather than twiddling their thumbs. Most computers will factor automatically.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2012-February-11, 17:19, said:

Yeah, I had about come to the conclusions that Sven and David suggest. Otherwise it's quite a mess.

I wonder if there's a movement around that would have made it easier, or at least possible.

No problem at all with series movements where everybody play the same boards during the same round.

[blackshoe]

Ah, of course. I should have thought of that, but they're so rare here it didn't occur to me.

[gordontd]

Since you had only played two rounds, you could probably re-organise it into a thirteen table Mitchell, retaining as many results as possible, and awarding AV+ for any that had to be cancelled. You might be able to increase the number of played boards with a late-play or two.

Whether all this is better than just living with having a sit-out in each line is something you would have to decide.

I would be less concerned about a sitout in each line than I would about having two sitouts in one line.

[CSGibson]

practically speaking, this can be just fine. Give them an unused deck, and give the two sit-outs the option of playing bridge with each other (shuffle/deal/play), but explain that it won't count toward their duplicate score tonight. They don't have to twiddle their thumbs, you've made the best out of a bad situation.

[barmar]

If you're going to do that, it seems like you should be able to just give them a rounds worth of boards, and add them into the duplicate movement.

[FrancesHinden]

barmar, on 2012-February-13, 13:19, said:

If you're going to do that, it seems like you should be able to just give them a rounds worth of boards, and add them into the duplicate movement.

Yes, as long as you've lost one EW pair and one NS pair so that nobody will need to sit-out twice, just have a new set of boards that sits permanently at a 'spare' table, that the two pairs sitting out play instead of their 'scheduled' boards when they are sitting out. The movement is worse in that you have more boards in play, and fewer results per board, but at least you know that the scoring will still make sense.