Slow weak pair
On one of our club nights we have a pair who are slow and very weak. One of the pair has medical and mobility issues that prevent him from attending any other sessions and he really enjoys and appreciates the club. Their average percentage is 30.
If a board they are due to play, but can't, is averaged, then this is deemed unfair, as AV- is better than they achieve on average. It is especially the case if that table was a minute late because of the previous pair. Their speed of play is unlikely to change.
All the best practices for ensuring timely play are used by directors, but often this is not enough.
As a club we want to find a solution where they can play, but a "normal" club night is experienced by all others.
The club's usual movements involve 3 or 4 hands per table.
One solution we have thought of for this pair to play 1 less board than the full set at every table. This way all the EW pairs will play the same number of boards, especially against this pair who sit NS. Assuming 3 boards per round of 9 tables, all the other NS tables will play 27 boards, but this pair will play 18. By stressing less about playing quickly they may also enjoy their game more!
I'd welcome views on whether this solution is legal, and also any other suggestions.
Comments
The law says
So if they are awarded AVE- they should end up with their session average on those boards.
(Assuming your scoring software implements this.)
I don't think there is any problem in the TD designating that the last board of the round is "Not Played" - that option is available in the Bridgemates (if you use them), although EBUScore will raise a few queries.
However, as Robin says, quoting the law, opponents won't suffer (much) if you give them AV+,AV- since they will score at least 60%. (There could be an argument that if a pair scores below 40% for the session then AV+ should be as a minimum equal to (100- their session score) - after all, the other pairs have taken more than 60% against the offending side, so why should the NOS be deprived of their chance to do so as well?)
The opponents can't actually lose by getting an average plus, because it's 60% or their session score, whichever is higher. I recall one strong player at YBC feeling he'd lost out because he expected to do better than 60% on the board, and I suppose there's something to that. But really pairs should be happy with an average plus.
I'm not sure about the legality of the proposed solution of the pair playing one less board per round, I guess essentially you're accepting that they're going to be slow enough to take a board away at the end each round. It's not that different from waiting for them to play 3 boards then taking a board away each round. You'd have to look out for the 70% rule for masterpoints, 2 out of 3 would be less than that.
I have had this issue ALL my TD life and it has been a matter for much discussion amongst the committee and that discusion starts with ' what is the culture and core values of the club' which are - we are a competition bridge club but we encourage tollerance towards less able/expereinced members. Then the question - what do the majority of the members want? Do they want to wait until the slow palyers play every board or average the odd board and do they want to wait for the final result whilst a judge and jury replay those hands and judge 2% here or there. I try aim to play 24 boards in 3 hours and that sometimes meana a hand or two gets 'averaged' and I've done that for over 10 years and whilst the question pops up now and again the members are generally happy..