[khjbsc]

I am a BIL member who was refused the opportunity to continue playing in a BIL tournament. After play on the second round, unfortunately I was booted from BBO. I reestablished my connection and returned only to find another player occupying my spot. Granted, I had returned well in advance of the move to the third round. Ironically, an expert player had taken my seat and I was denied the opportunity to continue playing in the tournament. Before the next round began, I spoke with the director and asked if he would give me my seat back. The response was negative. Why is this so? How can an expert player deny an intermediate player an opportunity to play in a venue that is tailored to his ability? This does not make sense to me. Rather, it discourages me from playing any further BBO events. Why is an expert allowed the opportunity to deny a BIL member an opportunity to play in a BIL event? The rules must change.

[blackshoe]

This was properly (and probably) solely up to the TD.

[khjbsc]

Yes it was, according to BBO rules, but does this make it right? Are the rules fair?

[cherdano]

khjbsc, the directors just have to set up some rules so they don't have to deal with too many substitutions, it can really become a pain otherwise. If you allow players back in, then many of them will lose their connection again. Also, it isn't really nice to the sub to ask him to hop in for the rest of the tournament, and then suddenly tell him to leave again after one board.

It's not so easy for the directors to be nice to everyone, have a little sympathy...

[cjames]

Yes, most TD's don't want to ask their subs to leave when they first have subbed. The subs are too valuable.

[jillybean]

khjbsc, on Aug 8 2007, 01:34 PM, said:

Yes it was, according to BBO rules, but does this make it right? Are the rules fair?

Which rules are these? I believe that it is entirely the TD’s decision to reinstate subbed players or not, unless given a directive by the tournament organizer.
Take it up with the BIL directly.

[sceptic]

A TD can make any rules they like (well within socialy acceptable boundries), fair or unfair, if you are the TD, then what works for you is fine by me.

if you dont like the rules there are plenty of other TD's running tournaments, try one of those.

personally, I think you are expecting too much, get a better connection, I often wonder about disconnects when I am a TD, I do tend to think there are a lot of people out there that just quit and blame connection problems (I am not saying you are one of them) but I fully understand why TD's come and go

replacing a sub is something I feel is not right, the most annoying thing is the partner that is left, qute often then has a connection problem and disappears, even if they are from another country, must be a virus about that causes the bad connection to travel across continents and effects the person sitting opposite

[helene_t]

I only direct indys so I obviously don't replace subs with returning players. But even if I did direct a pairs tourney I would not.
- Subs deserve to be treated with respect, if only because otherwise it would be difficult to find subs.
- Players that lose their connection are likely to lose it again.
- I would have to keep track of who had subbed for whom and when a board finishes at the table in question.

[Gerardo]

Disclaimer: not official.

Regarding subs, TDs set policies. Any policy is fine, if well disclosed in advance and consistently applied.
A "give back seat to original player" policy will make you starve for subs though.

Pay tourneys use it, as it makes more sense for them.

As suggested before, take it to the BIL, as they are the policy setters here.

[jtfanclub]

khjbsc, on Aug 8 2007, 03:34 PM, said:

Yes it was, according to BBO rules, but does this make it right? Are the rules fair?

Yes.

1. People who get disconnected once often get disconnected again. It's doubtful that whatever caused them to disconnect in the first place has gone away so soon.

2. Potentially, a person who subs and then gets kicked out when the original person comes back could get dinged by BBO for frequently leaving tournaments and banned.

I don't think people understand how much of a hassle it is for people to be constantly disconnecting and reconnecting during a tournament. It delays everybody at the tournament, and causes different levels of opponents in the tourney. While I understand that you're not doing this on puprose, it does take a bit of chutzpah to cause problems for a tournament, then ask the director for additional work, and then whine when they won't do it.

Me, I think the rules would be fair if a person who disconnected from a tournament for any reason were banned from all BBO tournaments for 24 hours. But the powers that be don't seem to agree with my idea of fairness.

[blackshoe]

sceptic, on Aug 9 2007, 02:57 AM, said:

A TD can make any rules they like (well within socialy acceptable boundries), fair or unfair, if you are the TD, then what works for you is fine by me.

if you dont like the rules there are plenty of other TD's running tournaments, try one of those.

personally, I think you are expecting too much, get a better connection, I often wonder about disconnects when I am a TD, I do tend to think there are a lot of people out there that just quit and blame connection problems (I am not saying you are one of them) but I fully understand why TD's come and go

replacing a sub is something I feel is not right, the most annoying thing is the partner that is left, qute often then has a connection problem and disappears, even if they are from another country, must be a virus about that causes the bad connection to travel across continents and effects the person sitting opposite

Here's a thing: it's not TDs who make rules, but SOs. Often the two hats are worn by one person, of course. TDs are supposed to go by the laws and legal regulations issued by their SO. The governing laws are 80F for SOs:

Quote

A sponsoring organisation conducting an event under these Laws has the following duties and powers:
...
F. Supplementary Regulations
to publish or announce regulations supplementary to, but not in conflict with, these Laws.

and 81B2:

Quote

The Director is bound by these Laws and by supplementary regulations announced by the sponsoring organisation.

So, technically, a TD is not permitted to make any rules at all. An SO is permitted to make rules, but not, legally, rules which conflict with the laws (an example would be a "no psychs" regulation).

All that said, "who you gonna call" if the SO's regulations, or the TD's rulings, are illegal? In theory, you can appeal to the National Bridge Organization (that's Law 93C), but who's the NBO for a game run on the internet? At the moment, that's an unanswered question. In any case, pragmatically, people will set up games using whatever rules they like, and players' only recourse is to "vote with their feet" if they think the rules are not in accordance with the written laws.

As far as subbing goes, that would fall under Law 81B1:

Quote

The Director is responsible for the technical management of the tournament.

A simple statement, but the task is not so simple. He has to consider not only the player who got disconnected (assuming that player returns), but also the player doing the subbing, the other member of that pair, and the smooth running of the tournament. It's not easy to keep everybody happy, and you rarely get thanks if all goes well. Let one player get upset about something though, and the excrement hits the rotating air recirculator. I sometimes wonder whether it's worth it. FWIW, I think the TD in this case made the right decision.

[sceptic]

Quote

Here's a thing: it's not TDs who make rules, but SOs. Often the two hats are worn by one person, of course. TDs are supposed to go by the laws and legal regulations issued by their SO. The governing laws are 80F for SOs:

Actually I do not think as an online TD, I am governed by any rules, the only consideration, I need make is, whether it would be against BBO's best interests and their acceptable boundaries for allowing TD's permissions and if I want to get people to play in my tourneys, what is good for them and what is good for the TD

I would be quite interested to know what body governs online tourneys? (I think the answer is none) if a TD chooses to abide by ACBL or EBU etc regulations that is their choice, I know there are some people that consider if Pshyces are dissallowed it is not bridge, so therefore it can't be a valid tourny, but that is their opinion.

This issue is about how the poster feels and unfortunately, I happen to think the TD in question is using best judgement by not allowing the person subbed to rejoin the tourney for reasons others here have stated

BBO to me is predominately a social site and replacing a sub with the person that is diasconnected when they return is not what I would call very sociable, nor in the long run is it something that will encourage subs to come forward and help TD's out (as that is exactly what they are doing)

[jtfanclub]

sceptic, on Aug 9 2007, 10:55 AM, said:

Quote

Here's a thing: it's not TDs who make rules, but SOs. Often the two hats are worn by one person, of course. TDs are supposed to go by the laws and legal regulations issued by their SO. The governing laws are 80F for SOs:

Actually I do not think as an online TD, I am governed by any rules, the only consideration, I need make is, whether it would be against BBO's best interests and their acceptable boundaries for allowing TD's permissions and if I want to get people to play in my tourneys, what is good for them and what is good for the TD

I think BBO is the SO. The fact that they select who can and cannot direct, ban some people themselves without input from the TDs, and take a share of the money in paid tourneys all point to them being the SO in a legal sense.

In fact, I'd argue that what gets played here at BBO isn't actually bridge (snide remarks omitted). There are no physical cards, I'm not allowed to cut, there is no table, etc. That it's a close enough simulacrum that the ACBL is willing to use it to conduct games is a testement to Fred, Uday, and the others. The rules that apply to regular bridge do not necessarily apply to online 'bridge'.

If you were to wander off during a face-to-face tournament without a word, miss several boards, and come back, the penalty at an ACBL game would not be "OK, we'll tell the sub who drove in for us to go back home, and you'll be allowed to continue, no problem".

[hallway]

Brian,

The TD did not sub an Expert player into the seat from which you disconnected

The software makes it possible for the partner of a disconnected player to replace the missing partner and that is what happened in this instance.

Upon your return the Sub was informed , the Sub chose to stay.

The BIL's Policy on handling disconnections is:

BIL Masterpoint - Pay Tourneys
The TD allows 1 minute < with fingers crossed> for the missing player to return
Non reappearance and a Sub is seated so that the tournament can proceed
The skill level of the Sub can depend on who has volunteered at the time - if we have a choice BIL TD's will always select the first Beginner/Intermediate on the list . However, often we have no choice - if the only name on the Sub list happens to be an 'Expert" player then so be it, the tournament has to continue. During the minute we allow for the player to return if there are no Beg/Ints on the list we do check the Kibs to see if we can cajole one of them to Sub for us if needed.
The ID of the missing player is placed on the TD 'friends' list and immediately upon reconnecting the Sub is notified , informed that the player is back and will be reseated - at the end of the round.
The Sub is thanked most sincerely for having helped out - tournaments would collapse into chaos without Subs.
The returning player informed

The BIL's BBO Masterpoint Tournament Rules are attached to every pay tournament and the Substitution policy of allowing the paying player to be reseated ONCE clearly stated.
Once is all that is allowed - the BBO software records every disconnect from a tournament and it does not differentiate between the ISP dropping them or my having taken the Sub out to put the player back in- the Sub could have connection problems of their own the following day and then find themselves with an automatic week ban from tournaments. (I am not sure what the % is these days to activate the ban but it was and presumably still is arbitrary and TD's have to keep that in mind)

Free Fun/Teaching Tournaments

The BIL members and the Teachers who provide Free Tournaments (restricted to BIL members) are free to set their own policies / rules governing the conduct of their tournaments and that includes the way they deal with substitutions. They are, after all, committing themselves to being available week after week at a given time, at no cost to members.

They are certainly not responsible for the idiosyncracies of member's online connections.

As demonstrated above, they do, though, have a responsibilty to those they use as Subs.

I do realise that it is disappointing for a player to be enjoying a game only to find themselves suddenly 'out in the cold' .

[golfacer]

We have some unanswered questions:

1. For how long was the player disconnected?

Quote

After play on the second round, unfortunately I was booted from BBO. I reestablished my connection and returned only to find another player occupying my spot. Granted, I had returned well in advance of the move to the third round.

Based on this statement, he was disconnected only during part of the break, not during actual play.


2. Who asked for the sub? Was it khjbsc's partner or the opponents? Or neither; the director saw a red space and filled it without asking anyone?

I was not watching, so I do not know what happened.


My experience has shown that directors, in general, are way too quick to sub out a player. It often takes several minutes for someone who is disconnected to return. Although are a few cases where the director can guess the player will not return (for example, if their last board was 4♠xx-3), I think it is a very bad idea for directors to generally assume the player will not return.

[Gerardo]

BBO is NOT the SO. It just provides the means to run the tourneys. BIL is the SO in this case, there are several other organizations which are SO, else TD is the SO.

[barmar]

khjbsc, on Aug 8 2007, 03:00 PM, said:

I am a BIL member who was refused the opportunity to continue playing in a BIL tournament. After play on the second round, unfortunately I was booted from BBO. I reestablished my connection and returned only to find another player occupying my spot. Granted, I had returned well in advance of the move to the third round.

Is there a language problem here? "well in advance" means "long before". So you got disconnected after finishing round 2, and reconnected before round 3 started. So unless you played round 2 very quickly and had several minutes left in the round, you must have reconnected pretty soon. The BIL policy that hallway quited above says that they find a sub after you're gone for more than a minute. Did the TD jump the gun, or did you actually return after round 3 was underway?

[jtfanclub]

barmar, on Aug 10 2007, 12:58 AM, said:

Did the TD jump the gun, or did you actually return after round 3 was underway?

I misread it as he missed an entire round. If round 2 play was over, but round 3 hadn't started, why sub him at all? If he didn't miss any boards, then my earlier statement doesn't apply.

[hallway]

The TD did NOT replace him

The TD was NOT asked to find a sub

The player's partner found a sub herself ! Instead of calling the Director she initiated and completed the replacement herself.

It was the player's partner who preempted the TD, not being prepared to wait for her partner's return - we are not always the 'guilty' ones

We cannot wait 'several minutes' for a player to return - it is unfair on the rest of the players and besides we have no way of knowing if the player will ever get back on - he might have had a power failure and be offline for hours !

If a table has finished the hand (or if the disconnected player is dummy ) we will hold up on putting in a sub - our 'one minute' is a minimum.

One thing I wish Players would stop - stop saying they are 'booted'. Booted implies that the TD has with deliberate intent removed a player from the game. It takes extreme provocation for a TD to do so and when we are forced to do that the player and those at the table are all too well aware of the reason why.

Players are disconnected for a multiude of reasons 99.9% of which have nothing to do with the TD - cyber space is a fragile thing, not to mention players who spill coffee on the keyboard , have the cat jump up onto the keyboard, the dog who pulls out the plug from the wall, we hear them all.

[khjbsc]

Please, let me clarify the situation. I was disconnected after finishing a round and reconnected before the next round began. My partner, loubel, contacted the director to ask why I had been replaced and indicated that a sub had not been requested. I spoke with the director before the next round started, but was declined the opportunity to continue due to policy.

I hope that the disconnect/replacement policy will be reviewed to better handle similar cases in the future. Granted, there is a director for a reason and calls need to be made. While the director has the final say, situations such as these need to be considered in light of the circumstances.