The second prompt, as sent, 12 September 2026. Nothing added, nothing removed. ========================================================================== You are an independent software evaluator advising a UK recreational badminton club. CLUB PROFILE - Weekly social/open badminton club night - 18-26 typical attendees - 4 courts - Mixed playing strengths - Players may arrive late, leave early or temporarily sit out - The club wants balanced competitive games without making people wait unfairly - The committee would also value ratings, attendance, payments and competitions, but successfully running the live club night is the primary requirement. CANDIDATES Each candidate is given with its canonical URL. Count them and state the number. Start at the supplied URL. That product's own documentation, help, features and pricing pages are in scope, including on a subdomain of its own, where they are reachable from it. Apply that allowance to every candidate equally. Airchy WebOS https://airchy.com/webos/ BadBoard https://badboard.net Badminton Peg System https://bps.graeyna.com Badmatch https://badmatch.app Court Buddy https://court-buddy.com Court Manager https://www.court-manager.com CourtMaster - Match Manager https://apps.apple.com/us/app/courtmaster/id6758101442 CourtsFlow https://courtsflow.com Digital Pegboard https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.digitalpegboard.app eBadders https://ebadders.com ePegboard https://www.epegboard.com Ladderly https://ladderly.online Matchit https://apps.apple.com/us/app/matchit/id6739728243 NextFour https://nextfour.app PaQueueKa https://paqueueka.info Qcourt https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.taforyou.qcourt QourtX https://qourtx.com Queue Master https://queuemaster.site Racket Arena https://racketarena.xyz Racket Social https://racketsocial.app ServeLeague https://serveleague.com Shuttl https://shuttl.app ShuttleFlow https://shuttleflow.ph ShuttleOps https://www.shuttleops.com ShuttlePilot https://shuttlepilot.io ShuttleStats https://shuttlestats.app ShuttlSync https://shuttlsync.com ShuttleVantage Pro https://shuttlevantagepro.com SmashHQ https://smashhq.app SportRevive https://sportrevive.com SportyHQ https://sportyhq.com UBR - Universal Badminton Rating https://universalbadmintonrating.com vsBadminton https://www.vsbadminton.co.uk RETRIEVAL Read each page as a browser would, with JavaScript executed. Several of these sites build their content in the browser and return only a page title to a plain fetch; treating that as an empty site is a false finding about a real business. If your tooling cannot render a page, say so explicitly for that candidate rather than reporting it as undocumented. IDENTITY DISCIPLINE g. Evaluate the product at the supplied URL and no other. If a search surfaces a similarly-named product at a different address, it is not the candidate. Do not substitute it, and do not let it contribute evidence. h. If you cannot reach or read a supplied URL, say so explicitly and mark that candidate U throughout. "I could not retrieve the page" and "the product does not document this" are different findings and must not be reported as the same one. i. If a supplied URL does not resolve to a product at all, report that candidate as UNLOCATED and score nothing. Do not infer a product from the name. TASK Research every candidate from its supplied URL and that product's own documentation. Do not reward a product for brand recognition, search prominence, the volume of available marketing material, or because you have encountered its name before. For each material factual feature: - distinguish VERIFIED FULL, VERIFIED PARTIAL, VERIFIED ABSENT and UNVERIFIED; - never treat an absence of public documentation as evidence that a feature is absent; - cite the official source; - use the same evidential standard for every candidate. Use exactly this pre-declared 100-point rubric: 1. Arrival/check-in and late joiners - 6 2. Dynamic next-game/court allocation - 12 3. Skill-balanced doubles - 12 4. Waiting-time / sit-out fairness - 10 5. Partner/opponent variety - 8 6. Explainability / transparency - 8 7. Manual override and special cases - 5 8. Player rating system - 7 9. Live scoring, statistics and history - 5 10. Multi-court display / kiosk operation - 5 11. Attendance and session reporting - 5 12. Payments and member administration - 5 13. Competitions / tournaments / league workflows - 4 14. Resilience and device accessibility - 4 15. Price and practical limits - 4 SCORING Use 2 = fully meets the definition, 1 = partially meets it, 0 = verified not to meet it, U = insufficient evidence. Do not convert U to zero. A resolved criterion contributes weight x score / 2. U contributes nothing to the verified score and adds its full weight to the unresolved maximum. SCORING DISCIPLINE Apply these to every candidate equally, including any product whose documentation is extensive. a. A marketing claim is not a 2. Award 2 only where the source describes how the capability behaves - the rule, the edge cases, the limits. A feature bullet or a benefit statement without operational detail is 1. b. Score the criterion, not the product's overall impression. A capability that meets part of the criterion's definition is 1, however well executed that part is. c. Self-consistency gate. Before reporting, list every weakness or qualification you intend to state, and check it against that product's scores. If you would qualify a capability in prose, it is 1, not 2. Resolve every contradiction in favour of the lower score, and report which scores this changed. d. A perfect or near-perfect total is a warning sign, not a result. If any product scores 2 on every criterion, re-examine it before reporting: in practice that usually means the rubric was resolved entirely from that vendor's own material rather than that the product has no limitations. State explicitly what you re-examined and what you changed. e. Distinguish documented from demonstrated. Where a capability is evidenced only by the vendor describing it, say so - for the leader as rigorously as for the rest. f. Cross-check similar evidence. Where two products evidence a capability to the same standard, they get the same score. Report any score you changed to hold that line. SPORT FIT State, for every candidate, which sport its own pages present it as being for. Some of these products are built for pickleball, tennis or racquet sports generally and mention badminton only in passing, or not at all. This is not a rubric criterion and must not change any score. Report it as a separate field so the club can judge it. REPORT A. Evidence table: every candidate, all fifteen criteria, 2/1/0/U per cell, plus the verified weighted score. B. Weighted calculation: verified score, unresolved maximum, possible range and criteria resolved out of 15, for every candidate. Show the fifteen-term arithmetic for the top ten. Sort by verified score, descending. C. Overall ranking, and say plainly how much of it the evidence can actually carry. D. Top three, with why. E. Material weaknesses of the winner. F. When another product would be the better choice, and for which kind of club. G. Confidence, unresolved evidence, and how much of the leader's margin is documentation depth rather than demonstrated capability. H. Sport fit, per candidate. I. Corrections log: every score changed by rules c, d and f. J. Retrieval log: per candidate, the URLs you actually read and whether each was readable, rendered, blocked or absent.