[sceptic]

Why does it matter if someone makes a mistake at a club and they decide not to call the director, I may be wrong but surely at a club on certain nights it is social bridge (albeit duplicate so there is some structure to it)

Why do people care more about the rules of bridge than they seem to about how badly they bid, play or defend

Why when (I may be wrong but this is my perception) someone decides to play bridge with limited, time and access to a teacher, everyone else assumes that they should take the time to learn the naunces of the rules, surely the EBU and ACBL etc , can come up with a set of rules for social play at a club and the expert competitive play can stick to the complex rigid very hard to understand for the lay person set of rules that prosper in their environment

each to their own I say, social bridge and club play is not the same as competitive bridge and many people seem to confuse the two

and for that reason alone I think that fred is doing the right thing in segregating the lounges.

It seems to me that the rule mongers amongst you, do not realise that you make the game as unpleasant for social bridgeplayers and the amateurs who do not understand or do not stick to the rules make it frustraating for you, I am not defending one side or the other, but if you play in areas of mixed abilities then you should expect this to happen and you should not debate it as it is one of lifes unanswerables and you are wasting your time because I assume since EBU and ACBL etc inception, this has been argued over and over again.

Tolerance or segregation is the key

Social Bridge verses Competitive Bridge take your choice you cant mix them both as you will never please everyone

[Codo]

HI Wayne

you are right, their is a big gap between social bridge and competetive bridge.

But the problem is not, that the competetive players like to have TDs ruling and like to enforce the rules. The problem is, that social players wants to play competetive but without following the rules.
Noone will ever enforce a TD to a private rubber bridge table. If you play there, you accept, that AUnt Minnie always shakes her head if her trump support is not sufficent and that uncle Louis is yelling "Double" for penalty and "double??" for take out. Accept it or leave.
But when these two try to compete in a club or a tournement, they have to follow the rules as much as you and I have to.

They don´t do so and I am quite frustrated about this, because it takes quite some time to explain them, why calling a TD is not the same as calling them cheaters.

But I must accept, that in the club, there are more and more social players. They are the overwhelming majority. So the good players leave the club one after the other and play online.

Just like you said: Segregation.

This is surely the wrong way, but there is no other.

[jillybean]

When we play monopoly I teach my daughter that she can only take the amount of money from the bank that is rightfully hers. When we play UNO I teach her that she cannot go through the pack and take out ‘pick up 4’ cards and that she must play in turn. Rules make the game, change the rules and you are playing a different game.

Why is separating the players who want to play in strict accordance with the rules of bridge and the players who want to play with relaxed rules a bad thing? It happens all the time in life, I think the problems occur when it is not clear which game is being played and people have different expectations

jb

[pbleighton]

"But I must accept, that in the club, there are more and more social players. They are the overwhelming majority. So the good players leave the club one after the other and play online."

Actually, where I play, many of them are getting too old to play or die.

It seems to me that good ftf bridge club games will be mostly gone in 10-15 years. I'm not sure whether there will be good (organized) online games to replace them.

As to the social/competitive split, I'm somewhat in the middle on this. I think:
1. Duplicate bridge needs rules,
2. There is a case that the rules could be somewhat relaxed, and
3. The behavior of some experienced players towards infractions of rules (or partner mistakes, etc) is terrible, and drives players (not just inexperienced players) away from ftf bridge in droves.

Peter

[hrothgar]

pbleighton, on Nov 12 2006, 06:20 PM, said:

It seems to me that good ftf bridge club games will be mostly gone in 10-15 years. I'm not sure whether there will be good (organized) online games to replace them.

Population density might have a significant impact...

I'd be surprised if it wasn't possible to sustain a decent game in a cities like New York or London. Large Universities still have bridge clubs, even though the popularity of the game has collapsed amongst younger people. However, if you squeeze 20,000+ people into the same small area you're typically able to find a reasonable number of card players.

I do believe that FTF clubs will need to adapt to survive. When I played club bridge, the main attraction was not the actual game, it was socializing with folks after the game. There is a good local bridge club 20 minutes drive from me that I don't bother going to... Its not system regs that keeps me from making the drive - I can play anything I want in the clubs - rather, there's no one my own age to go drinking with and discuss hands after the game.

As for online bridge, I'm not sure whether players value formal structure and organization or not.

[mike777]

sceptic, on Nov 12 2006, 08:51 AM, said:

Quote

But I must accept, that in the club, there are more and more social players. They are the overwhelming majority. So the good players leave the club one after the other and play online.

so what happened 15 years ago when there was no online bridge to run to and bridge was more popular than it is now, is there a link, is the internet is killing bridge?

I think bridge is more popular and more played now than 15 years ago. Maybe only a fraction more but still more.

1 million players played in acbl online games in the last 12 months. Granted this was not 1 millon seperate players but includes someone playing multiple times in different events but still.


I would expect in a few years more online sanctioned games worldwide than played face to face worldwide

[Echognome]

I find this to be an interesting topic. When I first started to take the game more seriously, I spent a lot of time reading through the rules (not so much the laws, but the Orange book which regulates conventions). I made sure that all of our bidding was legal at the appropriate level (and let's face it, only a handful of people would ever notice). And I made a conscious effort to learn to play the game fairly.

Then I had a lot of problems in the first club I played in. I felt opponents were taking advantage of the rules all the time. I used to call the TD when I felt something was untoward and this upset my opponents. I no longer play at that club, and I also do not call the TD nearly as often. My dilemma is whether we should try to educate the rank and file about the rules or let them carry on their happy way and not be bothered.

Here are some of a myriad of things that has happened to me in f2f bridge. Tell me which of these you'd be ok with and which would make you unhappy? Do you think we should be relaxed about the rules?

I open 1♦ playing Precision, partner alerts, and LHO says "Does that promise any diamonds?" and passes. We end up in some contract and RHO makes the inevitable ♦ lead from an unclear holding.

I open 1♠, partner alerts, RHO(!) grabs my convention card from underneath my scorecard knocking over my pen and scorecard. LHO doesn't on his 3=3=4=3 11 count and the opponents find 3♠ for a top.

In third seat I open 3♣ on a 2=2=3=6 11 count. LHO aks "Is that a normal preempt?" and passes. His partner then balances on a 2=3=5=3 8 count and this works out when they end up in 3 of North's major.

In third seat NV, partner opens 1NT. RHO grabs the convention card and says "8-14? You play 8-14?" (I nod.) "Partner, did you hear that? They play 8-14 in 3rd NV." Then he passes! I pass and LHO reopens the bidding with a double.

My partner is playing in 6♦ with AQxxxx opposite JTxxx as trumps (i.e. an 11 card fit). He leads from the ♦J and the next player takes one card out, replaces it in his hand, then produces a small diamond! My partner, not unreasonably, plays small and then loses to the stiff K offside.

My partner and I have a long relay auction bidding every suit along the way (but neither opponent doubling). South is about to declare and before East's final pass he asks about one particular suit bid (note they were all artificial). Gets his explanation and then passes. West leads that suit.

I could go on and on, but these are the types of occurrences that I suspect annoy some of those "rules sticklers" in the club. By the way, on some of these we had the TD over and got adjustments. I'm also sure that any number of forum posters could give similar stories.

Should we be relaxed about such occurrences? Or should we educate them about the rules (in a friendly way)?

[hrothgar]

sceptic, on Nov 13 2006, 03:26 AM, said:

ok comments on first one

Quote

I open 1♦ playing Precision, partner alerts, and LHO says "Does that promise any diamonds?" and passes. We end up in some contract and RHO makes the inevitable ♦ lead from an unclear holding.

my thoughts would be, what is this idiot doing in a friendly club and he is playing some weird system and I have no idea how to bid against this system (anyone that says you should study the opps cc is crazy, where the hell do you get the time to do that realistically.

I have a very different reaction...

There is nothing unfriendly about learning to play a game well and trying to win.
Furthermore, you don't get to cheat to compensate for your lack of preparation.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to play social bridge. Just don't get an illusions that you have some god given right to beat people who are putting more work into this.

[hrothgar]

sceptic, on Nov 13 2006, 04:03 AM, said:

Answer me this question please, I think it is acceptable for people at a table online here at bbo to talk to their partner to discuss conventions whilst they are playing etc it does not bother me and I think if it went to a general public vote no one else really would have issue with it, so why at a club f2f is this totally unacceptable?

By and large, when folks are playing at a club you are either playing a competitive game or you are playing for money. In either case, I don't think that its unreasonable to expect that the game be played according to the established rule and the rules of the game forbid players to discuss their mehtods at the table. There are some exceptions: In some cases, someone will organize a social game at the club where the goal is teaching or some such. In this case, you often have a relaxed rule set.

In contrast, many tables on BBO are extremely informal.
yes, there are scores, but no one in their right mind takes them seriously

[Echognome]

I think you made an important point here on your last post Wayne. In our club, we certainly have different nights for different level players. We have a "no fear" night which happens to be Monday night for our beginners. (It is also when most of the experts are playing their league matches.) I think that 99% if not all of the people that play on a Monday play simple system. I would even be all for restricting conventions on a Monday night to be level 2 (only basic Acol allowed). That way people can learn the basics about playing at a club and not have to face anything unusual.

However, I also find that some of these beginners want to learn something other than Acol. So how can they develop their game if they are only playing in the restricted convention game? So their should be an intermediate/advanced night for those that wish to go further. And indeed we have a couple other nights where there are some mixed ability. Finally we have a couple nights for those where we allow pretty much any convention. (In our club this includes things even up to HUM, although no one I know plays them.) This is actually quite attractive to the expert players as they can practice whatever they want to practice.

My main problem is that I don't believe that many of these players are taught proper ethics. Indeed, it is the feeling of many that some of those that teach the beginners in our club have some of the worst ethics themselves. Now that is a shame. I help out at the university bridge club and we have a wide range of abilities. It is an extremely friendly and social club and people seem to get along playing a wide range of systems. The students are of course eager to learn new things and when any of these ethical issues arise, we simply explain to them certain etiquettes about the game.

For example we tell them not to ask any questions about the auction unless they are thinking about bidding and the answer affects whether they will bid or not. We tell them that if they want to know about the meaning of an auction, to ask about the whole auction, not just specific bids. (Players are usually quite happy to answer at the end of an auction.)

As for the change in alerting rules in the EBU, I believe that they have actually made things much easier. Sure some of the alerting may seem silly, but the rules are very simple. I can explain them to the students in a few minutes. So I don't buy that this is a problem area. I just think the teachers of the game have a responsibility to tell their students more than just how to bid, declare, and defend, but also how to alert, how to handle opponents unexpected systems, and some of the proper etiquette of the game. To me that would cut down on a lot of the conflict in the club.

[matmat]

matt has mentioned quite a useful point here -- university clubs tend to be much more friendly and social than any of the organized bridge that i have seen. If there is one in your area and they allow non-university people to participate, try playing there once or twice and see what you think. Many of them are not sanctioned by whatever local bridge organization does the sanctioning, so there are no master points to be won which may contribute to the much friendlier atmosphere.

[jillybean]

Echognome, on Nov 12 2006, 01:25 PM, said:

Should we be relaxed about such occurrences? Or should we educate them about the rules (in a friendly way)?

LOL I have just read this post and these players dont seem to be the ones needing help understanding the rules of the game I'd say they know all too well what they are doing - what they need is for the TD to throw the book at them, open to Law16

jb

[jillybean]

sceptic, on Nov 12 2006, 06:33 PM, said:

A general question for all of you

someone phones up your local bridge club, "hi I want to learn to play bridge in a friendly environment"


5/. a different answer of you r own chosing

After looking up the information on a club web page I'd expect to be told something like... we have lessons on Thursday evenings for novice players and Monday evening for Intermediate players. After youve tried a few lessons you may like to play in the novice pairs game following the lesson on Thursday evenings. wtp?

The players who have little knowledge or interest in learning the rules will do just fine there, if you want to play in the open game you need to learn and play by the rules.

[Free]

"Social bridge" has nothing to do with being social. It's just a name for bridge where you can cheat and do unethical things without getting punished. The only way to fight this is by doing the same thing, but competitive players just have the discipline not to lower themselves to such level. You know at a bridge table you won't have great conversations, because these belong to the bar, after the games. I have never understood why people don't get a basic education of table manners when they learn how to play bridge. It's just one more lesson or so, they won't die from it, and EVERYBODY will be happier.

I used to bitch on every little detail because it really annoys me when all these things happen. Like shaking the bidding box before making a pass, asking stupid questions, leading out of turn and think they can just take it back, hesitating and taking other bids than the first one they held,... However I came to realize it's just not worth the effort. These people won't change, you can't teach them anything!
Now I just adapt to the situation: in a competitive environment people don't have to do anything wrong, but in a club context I just ignore it. This friday was one of my most extreme cases I've ever seen, but we just took our zero and didn't call the TD. My partner opened 1NT in 4th seat, and RHO was thinking about bidding. He took the pass out of his bidding box after a while, let it even touch the table, put it back and bid 2♥! Obviously we told him after the game that he couldn't do this, but that's it. Next time he'll just do the same anyway...

[hotShot]

The first thing i teach my bridge students, even before looking at the cards is that the referee in bridge is called TD and that there are a lot of unintentional 'fouls' that can happen. I tell them to remember that calling the referee is a normal thing.
I think all teachers should put more weight on teaching the laws.

When i play bridge, i want to have the best possible opponents. If they need to cheat to find the right lead/contract, they will give away a trick later or they compete as if they were strong.

Additionally if one is a strong player, one can make much more use of the UI opps exchange....

[mike777]

HOtshot, thanks for teaching and good luck.

[inquiry]

Social games are fine, and quite entertaining. You can go to Aunt Millie's house and play and have fun. Or on BBO you can create a total point table, even in the main room, and joke around all you want. Not only push the double key for your penalty double but type to the TABLE... "BLOODDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" to drive home the point. No one will care, how you play at Aunt Millie's or what you do in total point games.

Duplicate games, however, there is also a social responsibility. Why? Because the scores you earn on your table WILL AFFECT the results (scoring) at all the other tables. Within that context, the players at the other tables don't want to see 7NTxx on every board coming from your "social fun table." The society represented by the other tables in which your scores are DUPLICATED calls for people to be social too... but social in several context. Friendly, yes. But following the rules for the society made up of people who choose to play duplicate boards. Don't know the rules of bridge? That is fine. The simple rule is to try your best to win, and when someone points out, hopefully politely, that typing "BLOOD....!!!!" to the table is inappropriate, well, take it in the spirit of the game and slow learn what is, and what is not, allowed in the duplicate society.

I had this experience recently.. an opponent responded with shall we say is much less than normal (a 2/1 GF bid on 5 hcp) and his partner leaped to 4NT.. he typed to the table "lol!!!!"... This was in a pay-tournament, which is the most strict rule following competition.

[david_c]

sceptic, on Nov 12 2006, 12:45 PM, said:

surely the EBU and ACBL etc , can come up with a set of rules for social play at a club and the expert competitive play can stick to the complex rigid very hard to understand for the lay person set of rules that prosper in their environment

Interestingly the EBU seems to be seriously considering the possibility of suggesting different rules for "social" games. This is from page 3 of the L&E minutes for October:

Mr Martin opened the discussion by saying that the published regulations were fine for the highest level but those who played for fun found the Orange Book a nightmare. He was suggesting a simplified set of regulations that regular club and social members could easily understand. He cited Andrew Robson’s club where regulations were simple and easy to follow. [...]

Personally I'm sceptical. While I can understand the wish to provide the ideal playing conditions for every sort of game, I doubt that it's possible to do this without confusing everybody. Besides, I think that the vast majority of problems that you have in trying to apply "competitive" rules to "social" duplicates are either

(i) Fundamental to the game of bridge and can't be solved; or
(ii) Would not be so bad if the people running the game actually thought carefully enough about getting the regulations right in the first place; or
(iii) Could be solved by better publicity. [e.g. in the EBU's case, don't refer ordinary members to the Orange Book, but instead tell them what they need to know.]

[jillybean]

sceptic, on Nov 13 2006, 09:00 AM, said:

The opponent was openly counting till 10 and said my pard was barred from the bidding. WTF!

- I need to frequently pause to count and think. I am accused of deceptive play if I do.

Call the TD this is inappropriate.

To pause and think is not against the laws, for your partner to take any inferences from it is. If you are being accused of deceptive play on bbo find new opps.

I assume the players using complex and unusual systems are on BBO so its your choice to play against them or not. I dont like playing against these odd ball systems so I will avoid tournaments where they could be used, if Im caught out anyway its only 2 boards...