[Al_U_Card]

Fortunately, for me, I have always preferred playing to watching.......

All tables already have the option to deny kibbitzers so if the tourney wants to as well, np.

[A2003]

Is there any other game which disallows spectators?
Kibitzers should be allowed back to watch if all four players agree to allow them to watch. Just an idea.
You want to bring spectators to watch and learn and get into this game. I am sure that many bridge players learned this game by kibitzing the favorite players.

[inquiry]

A2003, on Dec 10 2006, 06:04 PM, said:

Is there any other game which disallows spectators?
Kibitzers should be allowed back to watch if all four players agree to allow them to watch. Just an idea.
You want to bring spectators to watch and learn and get into this game. I am sure that many bridge players learned this game by kibitzing the favorite players.

There are 1000's of tables a day where kibitzers are freely allowed. This includes main room, team game, public and private clubs, and many, many tournaments.

Nealry all the fee-based tournaments and all Money Bridge tables however do not allow kibitzers (exceptions are BIL and HB tourneys). This is really a very small slice of the bridge being played on BBO, and to be honest, the best bridge is not played in the tournaments anyway. Try vugraph or look for tables with gold stars or some of the very good team game matches.

I simply can not buy the arguement that people have to be able to kibitz ACBL, or skyclub, or bboland to learn how to play or to watch their favorite players.

[csdenmark]

Kibitzing is mostly a poor way spending your time.

You will not be a filmmaker by watching John Wayne.
You will not be an author reading books.
You will not be cyclist watching Tour de France.

You will not be bridge player by kibitzing.

Sorry to say - there is no other way than hard work.

[barmar]

csdenmark, on Dec 11 2006, 09:42 AM, said:

You will not be a filmmaker by watching John Wayne.

True, but it's still an enjoyable way to pass the time. Sometimes you can't commit to playing, and it's fun to watch others for a little while.

[barmar]

A2003, on Dec 10 2006, 07:04 PM, said:

Kibitzers should be allowed back to watch if all four players agree to allow them to watch. Just an idea.

Most of the time when you're playing in a tourney you don't know your opponents or the kibitzers, so how would you know if they're trustworthy? And every time the round changes, the new players at the table would have to be polled on whether to allow the kibitzers.

[sceptic]

ok, may be I am thick but, if you have access to ACBL tourneys you have to buy $BBO, so BBO know exactly who you are, so BBO could ban the cheaters, if you have explicit evidence, so why then do you need to bar anyone from kibbing that pays for anything on BBO?

[barmar]

I think the problem is that there have been lots of accusations of cheating, not that many of them have been proven. But every accusation has to be taken seriously and investigated. Banning kibitzers removes one of the common types of accusations.

[the hog]

csdenmark, on Dec 11 2006, 11:42 PM, said:

Kibitzing is mostly a poor way spending your time.

You will not be a filmmaker by watching John Wayne.
You will not be an author reading books.
You will not be cyclist watching Tour de France.

You will not be bridge player by kibitzing.

Sorry to say - there is no other way than hard work. 

Claus, the island of Mors must grow some pretty potent weed. Clearly you were smoking some when you wrote this. How can you become a novelist without reading novels? How can you get insights into filmaking without watching Bergman or Kurosawa? (John Wayne??????????????)

Kibitzing is an fabulous way to improve your game. Easy solution to all this is not to play in any tournaments where kibbitzers are not allowed.

[barmar]

Claus is partially correct. You won't become good at any of those activities JUST by watching, you also have to practice it yourself. You can watch all the Bergman and Kurosawa you want, but you're not a filmmaker until you actually pick up a camera and start shooting.

[Elianna]

sceptic, on Dec 11 2006, 12:40 PM, said:

ok, may be I am thick but, if you have access to ACBL tourneys you have to buy $BBO, so BBO know exactly who you are, so BBO could ban the cheaters, if you have explicit evidence, so why then do you need to bar anyone from kibbing that pays for anything on BBO?

People can have their partners pay for both entries, so they don't have to buy BBO$.

[csdenmark]

The_Hog, on Dec 12 2006, 12:12 AM, said:

csdenmark, on Dec 11 2006, 11:42 PM, said:

Kibitzing is mostly a poor way spending your time.

You will not be a filmmaker by watching John Wayne.
You will not be an author reading books.
You will not be cyclist watching Tour de France.

You will not be bridge player by kibitzing.

Sorry to say - there is no other way than hard work. 

Claus, the island of Mors must grow some pretty potent weed. Clearly you were smoking some when you wrote this. How can you become a novelist without reading novels? How can you get insights into filmaking without watching Bergman or Kurosawa? (John Wayne??????????????)

Kibitzing is an fabulous way to improve your game. Easy solution to all this is not to play in any tournaments where kibbitzers are not allowed.

No Ron I am not. I think people are upset because they think they are deprived their right to learn. And that has no sense.

First they are deprived no right - In rules for these sites, as I remember, Fred states that kibitzing is a privilege. I am not sure I agree or disagree to that.

But my message was that this it is not about your options to learn. It is nothing else than your option to enjoy and to have a nice time. If you want to learn bridge you need to study and to practice. By kibitzing you are mostly amazed of what is happening but rarely have the knowledge to know why you are amazed. - And that is necessary if you intend to try to do something of the same kind yourself.

It is fun to watch Balicki/Zmudzinski but if you want to play Polish Club you need to study Matula.

[sceptic]

Quote

People can have their partners pay for both entries, so they don't have to buy BBO$.

Why not have a cant pay cant play policy on ACBL Tourneys, I personally find the people that hang about waiting for someone to pay for thier services a bit like prostitution,

now if some of these people are suspected cheaters, then maybe a general ban on that type of player is needed, ban them for a month and see if the game quality improves, may be there is an incentive to cheat for this type of person, as if they get good results other people will pay to play with them.

I susppose that is giving someone a motive

[mike777]

At times you got to pay for buddy/partner because you signed on late and pard forgot to buy some bucks and ran out.....

[sceptic]

actually I am just peed off, that people pay me a dollar not to play with them

[mrdct]

The_Hog, on Dec 11 2006, 05:12 PM, said:

Easy solution to all this is not to play in any tournaments where kibbitzers are not allowed.

How is one meant to know whether or not a tournament allows kibitzers?

[the hog]

mrdct, on Dec 12 2006, 04:36 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Dec 11 2006, 05:12 PM, said:

Easy solution to all this is not to play in any tournaments where kibbitzers are not allowed.

How is one meant to know whether or not a tournament allows kibitzers?

Don't they usually announce that Kibbitzers are not allowed?

[mrdct]

Kibitzer status isn't displayed in the tournament information, unless the host chooses to mention it.

Whilst it is apparent from this thread that ACBL tournaments now disallow kibitzers, none of the upcoming ACBL tournament mention this.

The only way to find out if a tournament bans kibitzers is to enter and then see what happens after the tournament starts. Personally, whenever I enter a tournament and then discover that kibitzers are banned, I withdraw on general principles.

It is interesting to consider whether or not the kibitzer ban for ACBL tournaments is legal.

Law 76 seems to imply that unless kibitzers are doing something wrong, they are allowed to watch. Law 80 allows sponsoring organisations to establish special conditions (presumably including a kibitzer ban) but one would presume that such conditions would need to be published to be effective. Is the sponsoring organisation for ACBL tournaments the ACBL or BBO? Can ACBL masterpoints be awarded for a card playing session that isn't conducted in accordance with the Laws of Bridge?

[bid_em_up]

mrdct, on Dec 13 2006, 04:34 AM, said:

Kibitzer status isn't displayed in the tournament information, unless the host chooses to mention it.

Whilst it is apparent from this thread that ACBL tournaments now disallow kibitzers, none of the upcoming ACBL tournament mention this.

The only way to find out if a tournament bans kibitzers is to enter and then see what happens after the tournament starts.  Personally, whenever I enter a tournament and then discover that kibitzers are banned, I withdraw on general principles.

It is interesting to consider whether or not the kibitzer ban for ACBL tournaments is legal.

Law 76 seems to imply that unless kibitzers are doing something wrong, they are allowed to watch.  Law 80 allows sponsoring organisations to establish special conditions (presumably including a kibitzer ban) but one would presume that such conditions would need to be published to be effective.

Read the General Conditions of Contest for ACBL games,

http://web2.acbl.org...c/allEvents.pdf

(In the section on kibitzing)

and you will note that any player may ban any one kibitzer from their table WITHOUT cause. All the player has to do is say, I dont want you here, please go away, and the kibitzer must leave. (A traveling player can only bar one individual for a given session.)

Fairly easily enforcable in a face to face environment, but how can you do it online?
The TD cannot make the kibber leave (there is no "bar specific kibber from tournament function" that I am aware of), so then ensues a heated battle between player, TD and kibber. Additionally, this would now go on at every table, requiring a lot more TD intervention, not to mention a hostile environment.

Is this really what you would wish to promote?

A player in a f2f tournament may ask that more kibitzers leave as well, but must provide cause for their removal and "I dont want them here" or "They make me nervous" are not generally considered to be sufficient causes for their automatic removal. But in a f2f tourny, if this request was made, most kibbers are courteous enough to observe a persons wishes and leave. For some reason, the same courtesy does not seem to apply in online games, for the main reason that it is "anonymous" play, imo and no real repercussions if the kibitzer(s) just flat refused to leave.

Solution to problem, ban all kibitzers until such point in time a reasonable alternative can be provided (assuming there is such an alternative).

[mrdct]

So, in other words, are you saying that ACBL Tourneys on BBO are not being played in accordance with the ACBL Conditions of Contest?

I note that the ACBL Conditions of Contest state:

"Sponsoring organizations may, with ACBL approval only, amend these conditions for a specific event. Such amendments should appear in all printed tournament schedules and be posted prior to the start of event"

Obviously some translation to the online environment is required, but it would seem clear that for a ban on kibitzers to be legal in ACBL games, ACBL approval must be obtained (has it?) and the details of the amendment to the Conditions of Contest need to be stated somewhere that players can see when they are contemplating entering an event.