quadruple hesitation mitchell

[David Babcock]

A Google search tells me that a club in England runs this for 5 (!) and for 8 tables, but my interest is in 9 tables / 13 rounds and I can't work it out from those two examples - some of our players are on a crusade for 2-boards-max sitouts while the H-word (Howell) is anathema to others. Can anyone post a master sheet or point me to one?

DavidB

[Larry]

A Google search tells me that a club in England runs this for 5 (!) and for 8 tables, but my interest is in 9 tables / 13 rounds and I can't work it out from those two examples - some of our players are on a crusade for 2-boards-max sitouts while the H-word (Howell) is anathema to others.  Can anyone post a master sheet or point me to one?
DavidB

I assume you have a 1/2 table (sit-out question).

In ACBLand we use a bump movement when 8 1/2 tables or less. Four
boards a round, but the bumpers Bump NS for 2 boards, then EW for 2
boards and the result is a 'one winner' movement. A skip is involved
and usually play 24 or 28 boards.

[David Babcock]

Post by Larry
In ACBLand we use a bump movement when 8 1/2 tables or less. Four
boards a round, but the bumpers Bump NS for 2 boards, then EW for 2
boards and the result is a 'one winner' movement. A skip is involved
and usually play 24 or 28 boards.

and if you add the arrow switches ACBL left out, the balance becomes almost tolerable. :-) I'm familiar with H8ROVER for 7.5 tables but did not know of an 8.5 table version - do you recall its name? Always delighted to avoid movement design work. :-)

DavidB

[Larry]

I can not find 9 table 13 rounds rover movement, but see below for 3/4
Howell.

4.4 Rover Movements - page 98
Movements contains a large assortment of Rover Mitchell movements.
These are half-table games using a Mitchell movement with a bumping N-
S pair. In all movements, the bumping pair takes the next higher N-S
pair number. For example,
in a 10 table Rover movement, the Roving pair is 11 N-S. This pair has
a bye the first round, and comes into play for round 2, displacing
pair 2 N-S for that round. In this Appendix, the notation TT-RR refers
to a specific movement, where TT stands for the
number of tables, and RR is the number or rounds. For example, 10-9
refers to a 10 table Rover movement played 9 rounds.
Available Rover movements:
7-6
7-7
8-6 Skip after round 4
8-7 Skip after round 4
9-8
9-9 E-W pairs 6 and 9 do not move in a regular fashion.
10-8 Skip after round 5
10-9 Skip after round 5
11-8
11-9
11-10
11-11
12-8 Skip after round 6
12-9 Skip after round 6
12-10 Skip after round 6
12-11 Skip after round 6
13-12
13-13
14-12 Skip after round 7
14-13 Skip after round 7
15-12
15-13
15-14

http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/acblscore/manual.pdf

4.2.3 Three-Quarter (page 90) [Allows 9-13]
A Three-quarter Howell movement does not require all pairs to play all
other pairs. This movement has more than one stationary pair.
Available three-quarter movements [partial list]
7-12
8-9 2 bye-stands.
8-10
8-11
8-12
8-13 Official ACBL
8-14 2 bye-stands.
9-10
9-11
9-12
9-13 Official ACBL
9-14
9-15
9-16
10-11

[Larry]

Rover Movement

This is a method of handling a half table in a Mitchell Movement. The
Rover is an alternative in the Phantom pair and the Bump Mitchell. The
Rover pair may play in either direction, but North-
South is preferable because the movement is easier to administer with
a North-South sit-out. The Rover pair is assigned a number, one higher
than the number of full tables in play. After
sitting out the first round the Rover pair enters the game by
replacing one of the pairs playing in their direction.

http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/Movements/Team/RoverMovement.pdf

[David Babcock]

Post by Larry
This is a method of handling a half table in a Mitchell Movement. The
Rover is an alternative in the Phantom pair and the Bump Mitchell.

Yes, but we're trying to avoid a 3-board sitout.

DavidB

[Sid]

On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 11:19:43 -0800 (PST), David Babcock

Post by David Babcock

Post by Larry
This is a method of handling a half table in a Mitchell Movement. The
Rover is an alternative in the Phantom pair and the Bump Mitchell.

Yes, but we're trying to avoid a 3-board sitout.

I am afraid you will not be able to avoid it. Unless you choose the H
type movement. A double-hesitation mitchell gives you but 11 rounds.

Sid

[David Babcock]

On Friday, March 2, 2012 3:20:32 PM UTC-5, Sid wrote:
...

Post by Sid

Post by David Babcock
Yes, but we're trying to avoid a 3-board sitout.

I am afraid you will not be able to avoid it. Unless you choose the H
type movement. A double-hesitation mitchell gives you but 11 rounds.

yes, but the Double Hesitation Mitchell is not the outer boundary of the Hesitation Mitchell idea. Googling for "Triple Hesitation Mitchell" and "Quadruple Hesitation Mitchell" both produce hits: the former, a nice discussion of the rules of the movement (going so far as offering tweaks to improve balance), and the latter, two actual movements that a club has in its repertoire but for different table counts from what I need.

DavidB

[David Stevenson]

Post by Sid
On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 11:19:43 -0800 (PST), David Babcock

Post by David Babcock

Post by Larry
This is a method of handling a half table in a Mitchell Movement. The
Rover is an alternative in the Phantom pair and the Bump Mitchell.

Yes, but we're trying to avoid a 3-board sitout.

I am afraid you will not be able to avoid it. Unless you choose the H
type movement. A double-hesitation mitchell gives you but 11 rounds.

Which is probably the reason for "quadruple hesitation mitchell" in
the subject.

[blackshoe]

Post by David Babcock
A Google search tells me that a club in England runs this for 5 (!) and for 8 tables, but my interest is in 9 tables / 13 rounds and I can't work it out from those two examples - some of our players are on a crusade for 2-boards-max sitouts while the H-word (Howell) is anathema to others. Can anyone post a master sheet or point me to one?
DavidB

I suspect Hallan, et. al. covers this (Movements: A Fair Approach). They call it an enhanced Mitchell (enhanced because it's more rounds than a normal Mitchell).

[David Babcock]

Post by blackshoe
I suspect Hallan, et. al. covers this (Movements: A Fair Approach). They call it an enhanced Mitchell (enhanced because it's more rounds than a normal Mitchell).

A friend has a copy of that - thanks for that lead. That book is $145 on Amazon - bummer.

DavidB

[Sid]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 04:07:41 -0800 (PST), David Babcock

Post by David Babcock

Post by blackshoe
I suspect Hallan, et. al. covers this (Movements: A Fair Approach). They call it an
enhanced Mitchell (enhanced because it's more rounds than a normal Mitchell).

A friend has a copy of that - thanks for that lead. That book is $145 on Amazon - bummer.

Hi again

http://www.elsid.co.za/9t13r26b.pdf

Yes, this is a howell, but at 5 tables the pairs remain stationary,
albeit they switch in various rounds to maintain the balance.

Sid

[David Babcock]

Post by Sid
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 04:07:41 -0800 (PST), David Babcock

Post by blackshoe
I suspect Hallan, et. al. covers this (Movements: A Fair Approach). They call it an
enhanced

"expanded"

Post by Sid
Mitchell (enhanced because it's more rounds than a normal Mitchell).

Good try all around, but that book covers expanding a Mitchell by one, two, or three rounds, not four. But his discussion is so good that I hope I will be able to extrapolate from it.

Post by Sid
Yes, this is a howell, but at 5 tables the pairs remain stationary,
albeit they switch in various rounds to maintain the balance.

That movement is in ACBLscore and is one of the ones the players complain about. The five stationaries, fine. The twelve (assuming a phantom) who move, not so fine. We cannot pry a coherent statement of *why* they don't like it out of any of them, and this may be something they really should be discussing with their psychiatrists instead of us, but if we simplify (from their point of view) from the above Howell to a movement where they move 9 rounds in normal E/W Mitchell style with four rounds of N/S (albeit not to consecutive tables in the latter) stuck in in one clump at some point, maybe they will feel more comfortable. It seems worth a look anyway.

Dave

[blackshoe]

Yeah, expanded. Sorry about that.

Of note, that book recommends for nine tables and 13 rounds (26 boards) a Reduced Howell with five stationary pairs. It may not be quite the same movement that's in ACBLScore, I haven't looked, but if there are decent alternates, the book gives them, and it doesn't given any for this case.

I think you should give your players a choice: 3 board rounds and a 3 board sit out, or the Howell. Put it to a vote, once. Then go with whatever the majority decide. If it's a tie, well, I'd go with the Howell.

[David Babcock]

Post by blackshoe
Of note, that book recommends for nine tables and 13 rounds (26 boards) a Reduced Howell with five stationary pairs. It may not be quite the same movement that's in ACBLScore

It's the same basic thing - 5 stationaries, and the other pairs follow one planned path through the remaining positions - but the balance in Hanner's movements is much better. That is true of other reduced Howells in that book as well. My friend has gone to the trouble to study those and mutate them in some cases for consistency in where the stationaries are and then to produce ACBLscore movement files (which is where the information on the balance quality came from), and I've employed Pete Matthews' Bridgemats program, slightly tweaked, to make table cards - when we've proofed those, we'll run them instead of the ACBLscore movements because they're better balanced, but the players are very unlikely to perceive any difference.

Post by blackshoe
I think you should give your players a choice: 3 board rounds and a 3 board sit out, or the Howell. Put it to a vote, once. Then go with whatever the majority decide. If it's a tie, well, I'd go with the Howell.

We could resolve other matters as well, such as 7.5 tables: Howell or 2-way rover (with arrow switches please, folks, or I'm gonna throw up) or 4-board sitout. Your idea of a one-time vote is appealing, because all three of those options would likely be the popular choice on one day or another depending on the players who were there that day. One vote, one last whine from the losers, and done, sounds better. :-)

DavidB

[Robin Barker]

If you play 13 rounds, then an stationary pair must have 13 opponents (or 12, if there is a sit out) these opponents must move to get to play the stationary pair. So there must be 13 (or 12) moving pairs.

A double hesitation mitchell has N+2 moving pairs and N-2 stationary, a quadruple hesitation mitchell would have N+4 moving pairs and N-4 stationary. So for 9 tables, there will be 13 moving pairs and 5 stationary. This is inevitable.

[David Babcock]

Post by Robin Barker
A double hesitation mitchell has N+2 moving pairs and N-2 stationary, a quadruple hesitation mitchell would have N+4 moving pairs and N-4 stationary. So for 9 tables, there will be 13 moving pairs and 5 stationary. This is inevitable.

We're investigating this *because of* the stationaries that are a basic part of the game here in south Florida. If we can get the moving pairs moving more or less Mitchell-style through the E-W positions with a 4-table N/S detour, that movement might be more acceptable to the players than the 9-table Howell that also has 5 stationaries (for the same reasons you discuss), and the sitout is still two boards.

DavidB

[Bud H]

Post by David Babcock

Post by Robin Barker
A double hesitation mitchell has N+2 moving pairs and N-2 stationary, a quadruple hesitation mitchell would have N+4 moving pairs and N-4 stationary. So for 9 tables, there will be 13 moving pairs and 5 stationary. This is inevitable.

We're investigating this *because of* the stationaries that are a basic part of the game here in south Florida. If we can get the moving pairs moving more or less Mitchell-style through the E-W positions with a 4-table N/S detour, that movement might be more acceptable to the players than the 9-table Howell that also has 5 stationaries (for the same reasons you discuss), and the sitout is still two boards.
DavidB

[Bud H]

Post by David Babcock

Post by Robin Barker
A double hesitation mitchell has N+2 moving pairs and N-2 stationary, a quadruple hesitation mitchell would have N+4 moving pairs and N-4 stationary. So for 9 tables, there will be 13 moving pairs and 5 stationary. This is inevitable.

We're investigating this *because of* the stationaries that are a basic part of the game here in south Florida. If we can get the moving pairs moving more or less Mitchell-style through the E-W positions with a 4-table N/S detour, that movement might be more acceptable to the players than the 9-table Howell that also has 5 stationaries (for the same reasons you discuss), and the sitout is still two boards.
DavidB

David, did you ever receive an answer to finding a quadruple Hesitation Mitchell for nine tables? Or any other number of tables?

I just finished creating two Triple Hesitation Mitchells (9 tables 12x2 plus 10 tables 13x2) and I was curious about the Quad, but I also haven't found an example of one.

Bud Hinckley
***@gmail.com