Movements for 28 tables
I will be directing at a club at the end of next week. I am expecting to have 27/28 tables. I can do 2/3 sections but my preference would be to use Web Mitchell . Scorebridge has this movement but only for a maximum of 25 tables. Does anyone have web -mitchell movement ready for 27/28 tables that could be shared with me ? Are there any alternative suggestions for 27/28 table movement that could be employed ? I would be grateful for some guidance.
Comments
Although I could be corrected, I didn't think Scorebridge allowed section sizes larger than 25 tables.
Yes it is true . Scorebridge does not allow section sizes >25 table. Hence I asked for help
Which scoring software are you going to use?
EBUScore allows creation of movements up to 30 tables, so 28 tables with two sets of 14 is possible. (Tables 1-14 have sets 1-14, table 15 starts with set 13 going downwards to set 1 at table 27 and table 28 has set 14). There is a skip after round 7: 14 rounds are played for the complete movement but you could curtail it. For 27 tables a third set of boards is required and the movement is quite a bit different. Installation is free to EBU affiliated clubs. Since the 28 table movement does not come as standard it would have to be created. I have created the 28 table, 14 round for EBUScore if needed.
TBH - it would be easier to have two sections and score across them- assuming Scorebridge allows this.
> Which scoring software are you going to use?
Acoreveidgw
> > @Robin_BarkerTD said:
> > Which scoring software are you going to use?
>
> Scorebridge
As stated above, Scorebridge does not allow section sizes larger than 25 tables so you will have to run it as two sections or use a different program.
Kind regards Steve
I agree, running as two sections would be easiest, especially if you only want to play only 13 rounds (or fewer).
But if either (a) you want to play all 14 rounds or (b) for some other reason you want to run as a single section, then no need to run a web (reversing the order for tables 15-28), you can simply put out the second set of boards in order. i.e. table 15 starts with set 1, 16 with set 2,...27 with set 13, 28 with set 14. Boards can be passed down one table (& pairs move up) throughout the whole section. You still need to skip after 7 rounds.
27 tables would be a bit different, as you say...
A double-weave Mitchell is what you want, I think.
This is a method of playing a perfectly balanced Mitchell movement without any sharing if the number of tables is a
multiple of four. The board movement is less complicated than it appears; except for the half-time move, neighbouring tables always exchange boards. (EBUScore)
Odd pairs go up one, even pairs go down 1 for all rounds.
In 1st half odd board sets go down 1, even board sets go up 1
Then boards go up/ down six
In second half odd board sets go up one and even board sets go down 1.
There is a movement for 12 tables to play 12 rounds, without shares or relays, called a "Weave". Odd-numbered E/W pairs move one way, even-numbered pairs the other way, throughout the session (no skip). Boards are passed from each table in the opposite direction to the pairs (which, from the point of view of the table / stationary pair, alternates each round). At the halfway point, I think that the boards need to be passed diametrically across the room (i.e. from table 'n' to table 'n +/- 6').
This works for any multiple of four tables.
EDIT: Sorry, I see that WeeJonnie replied in the meantime!
Yep - but you would still have to generate the movement yourself: EBUScore does do a 28 table Mitchell but uses boards 1-56
Indeed, I only meant to say that it was pointless to put out the boards in reverse order when (in this case) the 'normal' order works just as well. You would still have to generate the movement for EBUScore (although it would probably be marginally easier to do so this way). & this is one of the reasons why it would be easier to run in two sections, for which the movements are already generated.
I'm not conviced this would work. Although 28 tables is divisible by four, you are effectively joining two 14-table movements with 14 rounds and that is not divisible by four.
This (post from Weejonnie & one of my posts) was in answer to the question about 12 tables, not the OP about 28 tables.
I don't think (though I could be wrong) that Steve was asking the question in relation to the OP.