[MomoTheDog]

Also sent personally to bridgebase.

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding went
(south-west-north-east)

2c-pass-3c-pass
pass-pass-pass

This was in a tournament.

I am west, the 2c was NOT alerted and the opponent did not say ANYTHING inform us about their bidding systems (which was precision).

I have an obvious takeout double if I was aware their methods was precision (2c = opening hand, 5 or more clubs). This would have very easily allowed us to reach 4h by E-W regardless of what north bids.

The tournament director is "*********". I informed his about the damage caused by their failure to alert.

He then said, "looked at it cannot adjust because you either x or bid"

I have no idea what he meant, and I continue to plead my case, but everything I said was ignored.

I am very unsatisfied by both the outcome and the way this tournament director handled this case.

[jtfanclub]

I'm looking forward to the day that the Precision 2♣ (which is natural) won't be alerted, and the SA 2♣ (which is artificial) will be.

Anyhow, why in the world did you pass 3♣? I would be torn between punishing them for not alerting their natural bid, and saying that passing 3♣ was not bridge. Since your partner didn't get the wakeup call in time, I'd rule it 4♥ by East. I know directors who would disagree with me, however.

[hrothgar]

I agree that you have an obvious takeout double of the 2♣ opening. Depending on the alert regulations that were in effect for the tournament you
might very well have been damaged by the failure to alert. (Yes, you probably should have asked when 3♣ was passed around back to you, but at that point you lost a whole level of bidding. Its an interesting question whether you're decision to pass 3C could be considered a double shot. I would probably say that it is)

Here's the thing... Why do you care?

Why does it matter if the tournament director goes back and adjusts the score?
Are you that desperate for external validation?

For better or worse, a large percent of BBO directors don't know what they're doing. They have been some attempts to create clubs that focus on the quality of the playing environment, however, most of these encountered problems because people aren't wiling to pay for that kind of service. They'll pay for masterpoints and lottery tickets, but they seem reluctant to pay for a high quality game.

[david_c]

Not an easy case. A TD can only deal with this sensibly if he has taken the trouble to impose a clear set of alerting rules.

For example, if you were using ACBL rules it would be clear that there was misinformation.

On the other hand, if your rules said "alert all conventional bids", it is much harder to make a convincing case that E/W have been misinformed, particularly on BBO where there is known to be a high proportion of Precision/Polish players. Note that a SAYC 2♣ should be alerted in this case, so assuming that an unalerted 2♣ is strong is very dubious.

But if, as TD, you do decide there was misinformation, I think you must adjust the score. West knows what is going on after 3♣ is passed, but it may be too late by then, even if you think it is clear that a double would be take-out (which I don't).

The TD seemed to be saying that you have to bid or double even if you thought 2♣ was strong; I don't agree with that. [Edit: Actually, scrap that. I don't have a clue what the TD thought he was saying.]

From a player's point of view, the moral is that when opps open 2♣, it is very dangerous to assume you know what it means. Much better to ask about it, rather than relying on the TD to be sympathetic to your assumptions.

This post has been edited by david_c: 2007-December-19, 10:11

[helene_t]

Why would you assume a non-alerted 2♣ opening to be artificial? Unless there is something specific about these players or this tourney to suggest that a strong artificial 2♣ opening is non-alertable, you should ask what it means. Also, if undo was allowed you could still ask for an undo of your first pass after 3♣ was passed out to you.

[sceptic]

Quote

For better or worse, a large percent of BBO directors don't know what they're doing. They have been some attempts to create clubs that focus on the quality of the playing environment, however, most of these encountered problems because people aren't wiling to pay for that kind of service. They'll pay for masterpoints and lottery tickets, but they seem reluctant to pay for a high quality game.

Actually I wonder how many TD's you consider are at the correct level

I have seen attempts by people that are nowhere near good enough to comment talk a load of b******s on the forums

the main problem with bridge and these forums and i AM SURE OTHER FORUMS is that the amount of worldclass TD's that can interpert stupid bloody laws is minimal, whilst the idiots that want adjustments etc etc etc against siocial bridge players are the ones ruining the game for the majority of social players and I wonder if there are any statistisians out there that can come up with a percentage of social players versus competitive players

[blackshoe]

helene_t, on Dec 19 2007, 10:47 AM, said:

Why would you assume a non-alerted 2♣ opening to be artificial?

I don't presume to speak for the OP, but perhaps he's from a jurisdiction (like the ACBL) where that is the case.

I've come to the conclusion that, on line or off, the rules are whatever the TD decides at the time are the flavor of the day, unless I see something in writing that says otherwise*. Thus, if no alert regulation was posted or linked for this tournament, there was none.

Same problem occurs in f2f bridge at clubs around here. The club owners/SOs will not publish regulations where people can read them before a game. Makes it awfully hard to know under what rules you're playing - or directing, for that matter. I direct at some of the games here occassionally. Last time I asked the club owner what convention regulations I should enforce, she said "just be nice to the players".

*Even then, since most club directors seem to think consulting a law book is an admission of incompetence, there's no guarantee they'll get it right.

[Codo]

In Germany you must alert prec. 2 ♣ bids, no discussion. Without an alert 2 Club is the strongest aviaable bid.
I guess the same is true in the ACBL-land.

At BBO you should alert any bid opps may not understand, regardless whether this bid is standard in your country or not. When I play at bbo, precision or WJ is played for less then 5 %, so any prec. player MUST alert his 2 ♣ bid.

So N/S are guilty under the Tournament laws of BBO. They failed to alert 2 Club and they failed to alert 3 Club (non forcing, preemptive).

I understand that Momo could not act in the first round, but after 3 club comes back to him, pass was no option. At least not without a long inquiry of the opps.
So he is responsible for his own bad result.

I would judge: - 1430 for N/S and table result for E/W.

This way, I would leave the table with four unlucky players who marked me as enemy, maybe I just rethink my descission- but no, I am not in the "Be friendly" mood today. It´s not yet christmas.

[paulg]

In Scotland, we play under the WBF alerting rules and a Precision 2♣ bid is not alertable as the bid is natural and shows a willingness to play in the contract.

As far as I recall, all opening 2♣ bids in England are alertable or announceable.

Paul

[olegru]

It is an easy case for EW side.
Even if West didn't ask about 2♣ oppening assuming it is strong and artificial, he must understand it is not the case after bidding went 2♣ - pass - 3♣ - pass - pass. He must defend his side and ask before the final pass. No any ajustment for EW if director was invited after West passed the second time.
Harder for NS. I assume they didn't post CC, if they did - no panishment.
If they didn't no ajustment until regulation rules for particular tournaments were posted and regulation clearly indicated that:
- 2♣ precision should be alerted, or
- system should be anounced, or
- particular system will be assumed until convention card posted.

[helene_t]

movingon, on Dec 20 2007, 05:46 PM, said:

If the opponents did not post a card or indicate they were playing precision, isn't the default assumption SAYC?

Of course not. The default assumption is "un-alerted bids are probably natural and/or standard, whatever that means. If in doubt, ask".

When you suspect opps made an alertable call but forgot to alert it, you must ask what it means.

If RHO opens 2♣ un-alerted and you hold a strong hand with shortness in clubs, it should not come as a big surprise that the 2♣ bid was natural.

[paulg]

movingon, on Dec 22 2007, 03:01 PM, said:

In the ACBL tournaments, it IS assumed that the opponents are playing SAYC unless the opponents indicate otherwise. An announcement is made to this effect at the beginning of the tournaments.

True, but there is nothing to suggest that this was an ACBL tournament.

[badderzboy]

The director also has the right to expect players to protect themselves so asking what 2♣s was b4 you bid is a reasonable expectation. You made an assumption and you got it wrong. I'm a qualified English Bridge Union TD and the 1st thing I would say is WHY didn't u ask! when they bid or even ask them b4 you start what system are you playing.

I have some sympathy that opps should really say what they are playing b4 they start as I do even if playing SAYC


Steve