Wherever I get the opportunity, I try to nudge bridge writers (such as David Stevenson) that there are other systems available besides Bridgemates. Bridgemate shouldn't be regarded as the standard scoring system, particularly when it seems to be so far behind tablet-based solutions which display far more information. The only advantage I see Bridgemate having is a much lower rate of handset failure during sessions, but of course that is based purely on my own experience, and it doesn't in any way justify a price tag that is three times as much.
EBU adoption would be worth a lot, as it has done with EBUscore, but I guess it has taken over the maintenance effort too. You probably wouldn't want that at this stage. But I think more marketing and promotion for BridgePal would help. (When we were considering the system, it looked as though all the adoption was slowly spreading across Kent/Essex. The nature of committee decisions is naturally conservative, and they want to talk to users and visit clubs using it. I suppose I did a bit of a Boris Johnson in that, after discussing scoring systems for many years in committee, I just went out and bought a couple of tablets to test it out for my own understanding and satisfaction, but at my own financial risk. I think you need an individualto take the risk if you want a quick roll-out, but on the other hand you need at least one other technical person who feels involved with these early decisions, because you'll need a back-up and you'll want to go on holidays.)
Sorry, ignore that deviation. My main point is that I think an article or two promoting BridgePal should be written.
Best wishes
Gavin
