Reflections on FNCC Hyderabad – 2024

The FNCC championships in Hyderabad concluded successfully yesterday. The event has attracted a lot of criticism, not all of which is unjustified, due to it being overwhelmed by the extremely positive response to the event.

Before we dwell on the problems faced in the conducting of the event, let us first remember all the good things that happened there. These were more than just the phenomenal response.

We will then reflect on things that could be improved upon. And lastly, we have to take into account what went really wrong and was totally unacceptable.

What was commendable

1. Hospitality
   To start off, the hospitality was as great as ever. There are very few tournaments in the country which offer breakfast, lunch and snacks on this sort of scale. And the packed dinner for people leaving in the evening is a thoughtful gesture that not other tournament offers, to the best of my knowledge.
2. Changes in the event format
   The tournament committee responded magnificently to the increased turn out in the Swiss Teams event. At 69, this is better than the past several national events where the prize money is significantly higher. And this was way more than the 40 teams that participated in the event in the previous edition. 

   The organisers responded by changing the format to allow 15+1 qualifiers from the original 11+1 qualifiers. Knock outs were introduced from the quarter finals onwards. This could possibly be replaced by outright knock outs from the pre quarter finals onwards as this decision was taken pretty much on the fly.

   Secondly, the Match Point Pairs event was made more meaningful by conducting a two session elimination followed by a two session finals. Ideally the finals should have had a carry over from the eliminations, but that couldn't be done this year for reasons that will be dwelt upon later. Gentle readers may recall that I had made this suggestion in my reflections on last year's event.

   The IMP Pairs event also attracted a record number of entries and the organizers increased the prizes there as well.

   The Board a Match event was replaced by a Swiss Pairs event which made organization simpler, both from the point of view of team formation (the third pair or 5th member from a team always had to scramble), as well as scoring (there is no ratified software to score a 6-0 scale for BAM). That event, too, attracted 50 pairs.

3. Increase in the number and value of prizes
   The number of prizes in all events was increased. The teams event had 16 prizes. The pairs events had prizes increased to 10 from the original 6. The total prize money was increased from Rs. 3.50 lakhs to Rs. 4.00 Lakhs
4. Availability of scores on a website
   This was another suggestion made by me last year. That it got implemented this year was thanks to the presence of Srinivasan J, the best scorer in the country. There are now plans to create a dedicated website for FNCC, which we hope to implement shortly, if not sooner.

What could be improved

1. The scoring equipment
   
   The first day took a terribly long time to finish primarily because the laptop on which the scoring was done hung once or twice, initially leading to a complete collapse of the Bridgemate Control Software. To resurrect the scores took a phenomenal amount of time. I am informed that the draw for the 4th round had to be done manually.At the very least, the tournament committee needs to ascertain that the equipment being used is in satisfactory condition.
2. Bridgemates
   Post the Swiss League, the entire Swiss teams event was scored manually. The only reason for this was a paucity of bridgemates. To be fair, even if we had had sufficient bridgemates, we may have still had to score the teams manually because we didn't appear to have sufficient servers.
   As Sandeep Thakral had once mentioned, "Review and analysis form a significant part of a partnership’s preparation work. And not having data available from a major event is frustrating".
3. Number of Directors
   Last year, I had mentioned that the BFI norm for directors is one for every 10 tables. We had only two then for 40 teams.This year, with 67 teams, we still had only one BFI directors Sathish and two assistant directors Sankar and BLN Rao. With no disrespect whatsoever to them, they were simply too junior and inexperienced for a tournament of this stature and size.

   Sathish, one has to say, made a tremendous effort to try and ensure the events were conducted on time.

   Nevertheless, the organization would have been aware of the level of participation a few days at least before the tournament started. Efforts should have been made to obtain the services of another director

   To run a Federation Master Points event without a director of Regional Director Seniority, seems absolutely incorrect.

   It was at my continuous urging that we had Narsing Rao officiating on the final day. The number of hoops one had to jump through to get this done defies description.

4. Room Setup
   One of the major responsibilities of a director is that of setting up the venue for the various events; number of tables, number of sections etc.This appeared to be way outside Sathish's sphere of knowledge and experience.

   I hasten to reiterate, this is not a criticism of his abilities. It is something that requires considerable experience which he, as all except a very few directors in the country, does not have.

   If Srinivasan had not been there to decide and get the room set up, we may have been setting up at the venue much later than close to midnight (which is when we left).

5. Tables
   The event has always been conducted using rectangular tables which, to say the very least, are extremely inconvenient for use. It shouldn't be difficult to replace them with square tables for future editions. This will ensure more efficient utilization of space and the possibility of hosting even more teams for the future.

Unacceptable

It gives me great pain, and even a sense of trepidation to pen the next few paragraphs. However, it is time we held our officials to account.

The designated Chief Tournament Director, at the last minute, indicated his unavailability for the tournament to a an unanticipated personal commitment.

It is with great disappointment that I have to say that the stories I have been hearing about this seem to suggest that it may not be as unanticipated as it seems. As none of these stories independently verifiable, I am not publishing any of them.

Nevertheless, to leave the tournament in a lurch like this, without making arrangements for an adequate replacement is simply not done.

The BFI needs to ensure that tournaments awarding Federation Master Points are not jeopardized by such last minute withdrawals of its officials.

In conclusion

In the end, a slight oversight on the part of the organizers almost led to the prize for the runners up of the Match Point Pairs not being awarded in the distribution ceremony, creating considerable angst for the recipients. While everybody recognizes it as unfortunate, the people at the receiving end had every right to feel aggrieved. One can only request them to forgive the organizers for their oversight.

This article would not be complete without acknowledging the efforts of Srinivasan J. The only reason for not having done so in too much detail is his personal request to keep things low key. His efforts in winning the Match Point Pairs event over and above whatever else he did, defy words!

As usual, request all of you to please publish your reactions to this article in the comments below. Largely so that they serve as a single point of reference to the organizers to make the next edition even more successful and the BFI to prevent the recurrence of such behavior.