Comments for EBU Pay to Play(P2P) for Scorers

Comment on The reason for this blog by Bud Abbott

Bud Abbott — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:39:08 +0000

I do not understand why the EBU password cannot be held in the scoring program and the results uploaded direct to the EBU.
When I queried this I was told it was for security reasons.
Are we to belive the old system was corrupt?
On the EBU site looking at the sessions loaded WHY is the latest one at the bottom?
Nice to see the EBU putting their priorities before the members.

Comment on Further correspondence with Barry Capal (General Manager, EBU) by Tony Staw

Tony Staw — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:48:36 +0000

I basically agree that the current system requires far too much manual intervention, and I will be trying your P2PEBU program. I think that most of the scorers who think the current system is adequate have not used the old system!

I have found the level of support from the EBU to be awful. Nearly all my email messages have been ignored, or inadequately answered, while the EBU continues to give the impression that the current system is working well. It think it is no more than adequate.

My two outstanding gripes are:

1. Potential members. When the EBU gives a potential member a number, this number is not picked up by scorebridge. If you check that person’s number in scorebridge, it is not found. However you can manually enter it, and ignore that warning that this number is invalid.

2. If guests play repeatedly you have to enter them as guests every time. This is very tedious.

Pinner Bridge Club

Comment on The reason for this blog by John W. Dawe

John W. Dawe — Sat, 29 May 2010 22:38:20 +0000

Uploading for 6 events per week I have been quite surprised that a relatively new system has progressed without fault as far as my club, Deva, is concerned.
I find it very simple to use. Possible problems for some clubs may be caused by slow or faulty Broadband connections.
The EBU and Scorebridge have combined to produce an excellent system which is effectively doing the job for which it was designed.

Comment on The reason for this blog by George Jupp

George Jupp — Fri, 28 May 2010 13:13:28 +0000

I don’t have a problem with the curent system. I upload two bridge sessions each week and am quite happy with the scorebridge and EBU approach. I can’t compare it with uploading master points as we never went down that road.

Comment on The reason for this blog by Mick Gavigan

Mick Gavigan — Thu, 27 May 2010 13:40:41 +0000

Graham

I don’t have time to continue this exchange but suffice to say that you asked for comments and I gave some. I don’t then expect that you will continue your complaining back at me. If your feel you need to leave the EBU then do so – that’s your prerogative.

Good luck with your future transactions.

Over and out.

Mick

Comment on The reason for this blog by Graham

Graham — Thu, 27 May 2010 08:50:09 +0000

Mick,
The method of sending Master Points to the EBU before 1 April was a simple and effective scorer-friendly process which could have been the basis of the new P2P process. The EBU have produced a system which does not appear to have been fully tested by scorers with slow internet connections. In their document
http://www.ebu.co.uk/pay2play/documents/P2PGuidanceNotesamountforClubs-FinalApril2009.pdf the EBU stated
“The process for uploading results will be as simple as possible and will have been thoroughly tested before we ask clubs to use it.”
Clearly from my own experience and others with slower internet connections, the system was not thoroughly tested before the clubs were asked to use it. At least one club has been unable to upload their data for the last three weeks.
Based on the information my club received before 1 April we decided to affiliate with the EBU for at least one year. We will decide before next year whether to continue our membership of the EBU. I suspect this stance is similar to that of other clubs.

Graham

Comment on The reason for this blog by Mick Gavigan

Mick Gavigan — Wed, 26 May 2010 14:29:26 +0000

Like anything new we have to give things a chance to settle down and any help or comments we give to EBU will no doubt be considered. There’s nothing to be gained by simply following the ‘knee jerk’ and switching to another system without first giving the first one a chance.

I have submitted all the results (two per week) since the beginning of April and have had no problems (other than minor teething probs) and find the system remarkably easy to use considering it’s such a massive change.

I’m all for ease, and have no longer to think about MP issue or going through the process of which county various visitors are in and whether they should be issued with MP certs or not. It’s all resolved on the night and the only thing now is to remember to get details of any visitor on the night.

I’m for the new EBU system as is at present thank you.

Mick Gavigan
Chairman – Ringwood Bridge Club Chesterfield

Comment on An interim solution by admin

admin — Mon, 24 May 2010 20:34:32 +0000

Peter,
There is no reason why the program should not work with other scoring programs than Scorebridge on the assumption that all scoring programs submit an XML file of the same format. I will make a change to the program to allow multiple clubs and passwords.
Graham

Comment on An interim solution by Peter Oliver

Peter Oliver — Mon, 24 May 2010 19:13:09 +0000

Will your programme work with other scoring programmes than Scorebridge ?
I score for 2 Clubs using Scorebridge and
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~jasmith/home.htm
J.Smiths programme and wonder if your ideas have not been thought through particularly using 2 different scoring programmes on one Computer
I am scorer for Bromsgrove bridge Club and Arrow (Redditch Club)

P.S a mention of what “captcha” means would help , not every Scorer is that Compter literate