[TylerE]

While playing in the 6PM Speedball tonight, a very unfortunate set of events transpired. On the first board of the 3rd round, partner opened 1NT (15-17), RHO bid 2♦ (no alert), and I'm looking at a weak 5-2-1-5 hand. Decent spots, very high ODR. After thinking for 5 or 10 seconds, I bid 2♥ (Xfer to ♠). After I bid 2♦ was alerted as 'majors'. So I call the director. Simple misinformation ruling, right?

After multiple TD calls (1 each by 3 of the 4 players of the table), it took me PMing the ACBL yellow to FINALLY get a director at the table. The initial call had been made with 13 minutes remaining. A director finally showed up at the 6 minute mark, at which point the director started complaining at US for not 'playing on' even went so far as to say '100%' fault to NS (our direction). How exactly is one supposed to 'play on' after such an event?

The final result was adjusted to Ave== on all 3 boards. This does not seem right to me. While I can understand it somewhat on the 2nd and 3rd boards, it seems a bit unjust on the board we actually (attempted) to play. As non-offening side, aren't we entitled to some sort of positive adjustment?

[mike777]

This is exactly the type of thing you should PM or email bbonick..."ACBL" about. I have found her to be very proactive and responsive in fixing or improving these types of issues in Future ACBL BBO games. If you have not all ready send another email to her with the director, date of game and time of game with an explanation....

Bottom line if the issue is not enough directors for the number of players at 6pm she can try and fix this in the future.

[TylerE]

'ACBL' was the one who finally handled the call.

[blackshoe]

So what was the deal here? "If you call a director and no one shows up, just keep on playing"? That's illegal.

[jillybean]

TylerE, on Jun 9 2008, 04:05 PM, said:

As non-offening side, aren't we entitled to some sort of positive adjustment?

Yes

[TylerE]

blackshoe, on Jun 9 2008, 08:13 PM, said:

So what was the deal here? "If you call a director and no one shows up, just keep on playing"? That's illegal.

Yes. that was EXACTLY what the head ACBL director told me to. I am really not happy about this, and will not play in ACBL games until something is done to turn those masterpoint treadmills into something at least resembling bridge.

[glen]

What happens if you play out the board?

This is the traveller:

ACBL Speedball 20080609 6pm Board 7 Traveller

As you can see, for these "masterpoint treadmills" it pays to be a hamster, even if you don't like the stuff going on sometimes.

[blackshoe]

Hm. Is that IMPs in the score column?

It pays to be a hamster only if you think masterpoints are worth something.

[1eyedjack]

They give out masterpoints for speedball events? Sheesh.

[Old York]

Hi
You may have lost the sympathy of td for many reasons. I imagine that the alert for oppo's 2D bid was only given as a reply to your partner clicking on the bid. Your rho then gave a reasonable reply. He could have refused to answer, claiming "no partnership agreement"

I notice that your own 2H bid contained the explanation "no information available"
does this mean that you also failed to alert, but then refused to explain after oppos clicked on YOUR bid?

In any tournament it is a good idea to click on any unexpected oppo bid, before making any bid (natural or artificial). Your partner's subsequent bidding might have seemed unusual, which may have also contributed to td's final decision.

Tony (Duke of York)

[TylerE]

No, I alerted my bid as spades originally. At some point among the director calls some one clicked it again and I guess I hit cancel. Partner's furthur bidding was after the excessive prodding from the TD to 'play on'.

[paulg]

Compared to the offline game, the TD appears to have performed poorly.

I'm sure that the environment has contributed to this - firstly, after the late alert, the non-offender would be able to change his call but I expect that undo's are not permitted in these tournaments and so the TD's options are limited. Perhaps this is sufficient for an artificial adjusted score, but in that case I would expect the non-offenders to receive A+.

Secondly, if the TD believes that the board should continue, then an adjusted score would be appropriate and assigning averages is wrong. But it takes time to do this and perhaps it is not done in these events.

Understandable I suppose, but not a great advertisement for the ACBL games.

Paul

[fred]

cardsharp, on Jun 12 2008, 05:51 PM, said:

Understandable I suppose, but not a great advertisement for the ACBL games.

That's why we appreciate people not making these sort of posts.

BBO could not exist in its current form if it were not for the revenue we earn by running pay tournaments in general and ACBL pay tournaments in particular.

We definitely don't need, nor do I think we deserve, this sort of "bad advertising" especially on our own site. This sort of post can only hurt BBO.

I have good reason to believe that our ACBL TDs by and large do an excellent job, but even the best TDs sometimes make poor rulings. Even the best online TDs are sometimes overwhelmed with a large # of TDs calls, lots of players having connection problems, a particular rude or argumentative player or players etc...

Sorry to have to tell you this, but you are going to get bad rulings (or rulings that you think are bad) from time to time wherever you choose to play your bridge.

That being said, we are doing the best we can to ensure that our ACBL TDs perform as well as possible and that they learn from their mistakes. If you e-mail acbl@bridgebase.com your concern will be taken seriously. We really do take an active interest in quality control regarding our ACBL TDs.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jtfanclub]

fred, on Jun 12 2008, 01:46 PM, said:

cardsharp, on Jun 12 2008, 05:51 PM, said:

Understandable I suppose, but not a great advertisement for the ACBL games.

That being said, we are doing the best we can to ensure that our ACBL TDs perform as well as possible and that they learn from their mistakes. If you e-mail acbl@bridgebase.com your concern will be taken seriously. We really do take an active interest in quality control regarding our ACBL TDs.

Unfortunately, the complaint is about Jacki/ACBL, who I assume (perhaps wrongly) is also the recipient of acbl@bridgebase emails.

So if somebody has a complaint about her (I certainly don't), who do you recommend? Go up the chain in BBO or go up the chain in the ACBL?

[fred]

jtfanclub, on Jun 12 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

fred, on Jun 12 2008, 01:46 PM, said:

cardsharp, on Jun 12 2008, 05:51 PM, said:

Understandable I suppose, but not a great advertisement for the ACBL games.

That being said, we are doing the best we can to ensure that our ACBL TDs perform as well as possible and that they learn from their mistakes. If you e-mail acbl@bridgebase.com your concern will be taken seriously. We really do take an active interest in quality control regarding our ACBL TDs.

Unfortunately, the complaint is about Jacki/ACBL, who I assume (perhaps wrongly) is also the recipient of acbl@bridgebase emails.

So if somebody has a complaint about her (I certainly don't), who do you recommend? Go up the chain in BBO or go up the chain in the ACBL?

If you think something is broken you can always e-mail me and/or Uday.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[TimG]

Sorry, not my place to say such things. Hope I managed to edit before many read, and especially before anyone quoted.

[sceptic]

Quote

In other words, quality of service is a secondary consideration to revenues.

I am quite amazed at you Tim, when have you ever seen Fred and Uday do something that is secondary to the BBO site regarding quality of service

as for revenue, I am sure that if ABCL tourneys are really helping to finance this free site, then may be we should accept that there will be limitations to what can be achieved

I think Fred deserves an apology for that comment, but I expect that would fall on deaf ears

As for ACBL contributing to the running of BBO ( financially, I would hope that the anti ACBL brigade, decide that thier moral standpoint would be, they feel it unacceptable that an organisation they hate is giving them (or enabling something to remain free for us all) something for nothing) as this is the case, I think the Anti ACBL brigade should boycott this site and never come back (Oh happy days for us all)

[fred]

TimG, on Jun 12 2008, 08:47 PM, said:

In other words, quality of service is a secondary consideration to revenues.

In other words, quality of air is a secondary consideration to oxygen.

I suppose you disagree with that too.

Quote

I can think of a number of ways in which this post might help BBO.

Good for you, but this is our site and there are specific subjects we have asked(politely in most cases) for people not to discuss here. I don't see why that should be so difficult to accept. Besides that, I believe it is both poor manners and poor taste to write "look how stupid BBO is" posts when BBO are the ones who are hosting this site in the first place.

Posts that say "look how stupid BBO is" put us in an impossible position. We can either ignore such posts (giving people the impression we don't care) or waste time defending ourselves and/or issuing public apologies when appropriate. Inevitably we end up wasting still more time responding to people like you who seem to enjoy fanning the flames.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[TylerE]

Fred, I don't think at in point in this thread I have criticized BBO. ACBL on BBO, yes, BBO no. I think that's an important distinction.

[sceptic]

Quote

and will not play in ACBL games until something is done to turn those masterpoint treadmills into something at least resembling bridge.

Bet no one can guess where he is at this moment in time?