[pran]

PeterE, on Mar 12 2010, 07:59 AM, said:

bluejak, on Mar 11 2010, 08:00 PM, said:

Thinking back, and my memory is not that good, I believe this is the first time this has ever happened to me.

Well, as Frances said: "Surely one of the advantages of being at your local club is that you get to know the players."

And the director!

[McBruce]

I used to have a clock program that beeped out the first four notes of the Dragnet theme at four minutes left in the round...

I think that players who have played the first two boards of a 20 minute round in 16 minutes should be at least vaguely aware of that and strive to avoid delays on the third. But, in making the rounds to see who is in time trouble, when I tell people who are bidding their last board that they need to finish quickly, I am often ignored and the pace seems to slow down further. Drives me nuts, almost as much as the player (there are thousands of this type out there) who finishes a round five minutes after it is called and goes off past those waiting to take his seat to get coffee, saying "I'm a fast player." When I reply "so prove it and THEN get your coffee," I get called a dictator.

Every TD should have a spiel, much like the OLOOT spiel, that gets said to a table that finishes late. As soon as they have a result, I tell them something like "you've used 26 minutes on a 20 minute round, so you need to catch up over the next round or two. No need to play 'fast' -- just minimize the delays between deals and rounds and you'll be caught up by round six." When players claim the other side was at fault, I tell them that they needed to tell me that when the delay took place. I find the key is to be understanding and positive instead of accusing and sarcastic. (And have a break or two during the game so habitual offenders can get caught up.)

Illegal or not, it's just bad customer relations to take a board away that has been started.

[chastibb]

This is a quote from the EBU White Book that I used when TD’ing for slow play

<<Quote ..81.4.2 Pairs events
If the TD is unable to establish which pair is to blame, then he should award average for each board removed. A non-offending pair is entitled to A+, and an offending pair receives A– (see #12.1.1).
A TD is entitled to be stricter with a pair known to be slow. Inexperienced players, the infirm and the elderly should be treated less strictly.Unquote>>

In a club where you have TD’d for many years you “know” the players that play slowly and it’s the TD’s job to watch these players.

They used to get one warning and if slow play continued a board was removed. It is in black and white that you can do this (see above) and one of the posters edits this book.

The score assigned for slow play was as quoted above so how folk can say its “illegal” is beyond me.

After applying this remedy the slow players soon speeded up and eventually "slow play" went away.

EBU land

[VixTD]

chastibb, on Mar 12 2010, 09:16 AM, said:

They used to get one warning and if slow play continued a board was removed. It is in black and white that you can do this (see above) and one of the posters edits this book.

The score assigned for slow play was as quoted above so how folk can say its “illegal” is beyond me.

But the board that the White Book suggests the TD remove from the slow players is not the one they are currently playing, it is one of the boards they have yet to play. It is the removal of boards which have been started legitimately that people are suggesting is illegal.

[VixTD]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 11 2010, 05:26 PM, said:

Surely one of the advantages of being at your local club is that you get to know the players. Most clubs have repeated slow play offenders and it seems right to me that the TD keeps the discretion of when to keep remove boards or not, using the buzzer as a guide.

It's really irritating if you arrive at the table late because the people you are following finished the previous round late, then your opponents take a long time over the first board, then the second board gets taken away... and you are the fastest pair in the room.

I agree with this, the timer should be the servant of the TD and not his master, and I will not cede control of the game to a machine. I tell the players that they don't move for the next round until I tell them to (although they do have to obey the two-minute warning without being told), and I will deviate from my timekeeping rules for (what I consider to be) good cause.

Some players accept the loss of a board with good grace, even though they are not at fault, and others will fight tooth and nail for their right to play every board, even though they were probably the cause of the delay. I think the committee are keen to introduce a clear rule that applies to all.

I used to direct county tournaments where there was a very well-known expert player who had become very slow in his old age. The pair following him complained with some justification that they were at a disadvantage to everyone else because they were always starting late and thus had less time than everyone else to play a round. Even if I removed a board it wasn't long before they fell behind again. At least I was a non-playing director and could keep an eye on them.

[pran]

I have a firm opinion that it must be illegal for the Director to stop play on a board once the auction period for that board has begun (Law 17A: The auction period on a deal begins for a side when either partner withdraws his cards from the board. and Law 8B1: In general, a round ends when the Director gives the signal for the start of the following round; but if any table has not completed play by that time, the round continues for that table until there has been a progression of players.)

However, the Director is at liberty to impose a penalty on players that have not finished play on a board in time. (Law 90)

What I sometimes have done when noticing that a table is running late and still has not started on their last board when there is say 3 to 5 minutes left of the round is to give them the following "offer":

You may skip the last board in which case both sides receive A-, or you may play the board and have it scored normally. However, if you then do not finish in time both sides will receive a late play penalty equivalent to double A-.

Most often they take the challenge, play the board and finish on time!

[blackshoe]

While I can sympathize with a player who has been slowed down by age (after all, I'm one of them! ) and I agree that generally one should be a bit more lenient on such players than one might otherwise be, when such a player causes (or might cause) multiple boards to be lost by other pairs, something needs to be done about it other than just taking away boards from the other pairs. Well known expert or not.

[VixTD]

blackshoe, on Mar 12 2010, 11:46 AM, said:

While I can sympathize with a player who has been slowed down by age (after all, I'm one of them! ) and I agree that generally one should be a bit more lenient on such players than one might otherwise be, when such a player causes (or might cause) multiple boards to be lost by other pairs, something needs to be done about it other than just taking away boards from the other pairs. Well known expert or not.

Excluding them from the tournament is the only solution that springs to mind (or dissuading them from entering), and that's more the job of the organiser than the director.

[blackshoe]

Are we to understand that this person plays so slowly as to preclude the pair following him from completing all their scheduled boards in a round, but not so slowly that he should get boards taken away from him?

[Pig Trader]

VixTD, on Mar 12 2010, 02:50 PM, said:

.... the timer should be the servant of the TD and not his master, and I will not cede control of the game to a machine.

Excellent, James! My club committee are wittering on about wanting a timer and you've given me the perfect wording with which to reply if they manage to get one!

[chastibb]

VixTD
Of course Law 8B prevents you from removing a board from the current round once started
I used to remove a board for the offenders inbetween rounds.

[bluejak]

chastibb, on Mar 12 2010, 03:16 PM, said:

This is a quote from the EBU White Book that I used when TD’ing for slow play

<<Quote ..81.4.2 Pairs events
If the TD is unable to establish which pair is to blame, then he should award average for each board removed. A non-offending pair is entitled to A+, and an offending pair receives A– (see #12.1.1).
A TD is entitled to be stricter with a pair known to be slow. Inexperienced players, the infirm and the elderly should be treated less strictly.Unquote>>

In a club where you have TD’d for many years you “know” the players that play slowly and it’s the TD’s job to watch these players.

They used to get one warning and if slow play continued a board was removed. It is in black and white that you can do this (see above) and one of the posters edits this book.

The score assigned for slow play was as quoted above so how folk can say its “illegal” is beyond me.

It is legal [and normal] to remove a board that has not been started. Once the auction has commenced it may not be stopped.

[bluejak]

Certainly you can take away a board from the current round so long as it has not been started. And Law 88 is not a Law that really exists: are you sure you are looking in the current book?

[dburn]

bluejak, on Mar 13 2010, 10:43 AM, said:

Certainly you can take away a board from the current round so long as it has not been started. And Law 88 is not a Law that really exists: are you sure you are looking in the current book?

Are you sure you are looking at the current screen? The reference was to Law 8B, not Law 88.

[blackshoe]

Yes. I suspect it may have been changed at some point, or perhaps David misread it.

More interesting is the question whether 8B actually says what's asserted. I suspect the poster believes that rounds are sequential and non-overlapping, but Law 8B2 pretty clearly says (to me, at least) that if the TD directs that say, play of the third board of round 2 be postponed, and (implicitly, at least) that the players move on to round 3 then round 3 is (and subsequent rounds, in their turn are) started even though round 2 has not yet (technically) finished for the pairs in question.

Put it this way: if a round has ended for the players concerned, you can't postpone any boards, because they all will have been played.

[bluejak]

It still looks like 88 to me, but I see what you mean. However, 8B does not say a board may not be removed, so while at least the Law has relevance, it does not stop removal of a board.

[Mbodell]

We have a local club game that is run with time efficiency as one of the main goals. The directors there strongly say don't start the last board if there is 4 minutes or less on the clock (sometimes in a 15 minute 2 board round, sometimes in a 21 minute 3 board round). It is enforced often but not always.

I dislike this take. I think the beep at 2 minutes is the right time to tell pairs to move if they can and to expect the slow tables to pass their boards. But I think folks should be able to start boards up to when the clock hits 0. I also agree that removing a board once the auction has started is terrible. A different local director (who primarily does 299er games) does that.

Just yesterday in the first round of the second session of the national IMP pairs our opponents from the last round hadn't started their second board when the 15 minutes for round 1 expired. The bid and claimed and were at our table in less than 2 minutes though, so decent players can be fast when needed.

[Cyberyeti]

bluejak, on Mar 11 2010, 08:00 PM, said:

Well, folks, tonight the TD took the board away after two rounds of bidding over my vehement objections that it was illegal. Slightly different insofar as this club has no stated policy: I do not like a policy that allows illegal actions by TDs but at least you know where you are. When I said it was illegal the TD said I had not led. Thinking back, and my memory is not that good, I believe this is the first time this has ever happened to me.

Do you have the reference as to it being illegal to remove a board after bidding has started.

Director removed a board from me with one bid left in the auction, partner was about to double for a telephone number, after our opps had arrived at the table a board and a half late. I told him he couldn't do that, he wasn't having any of it.

[dburn]

Cyberyeti, on Mar 14 2010, 06:17 AM, said:

Do you have the reference as to it being illegal to remove a board after bidding has started?

There is no explicit reference to the removal of a board at any time being illegal - it is an inference drawn from Law 8B (where 8 is the integer one greater than 7 and B is the first letter of the word Bravo):

Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge said:

8: SEQUENCE OF ROUNDS

B. End of Round

1. In general, a round ends when the Director gives the signal for the start of the following round; but if any table has not completed play by that time, the round continues for that table until there has been a progression of players.

[chastibb]

For Cyber Yeti

Definition: “Play” the front of the 2007 Law Book

<<Quote Play — 1. The contribution of a card from one’s hand to a trick, including
the first card, which is the lead. 2. The aggregate of plays made. 3. The period during which the cards are played. 4. The aggregate of the calls and plays on a board.
>>End quote

<<Quote Law 8B. End of Round
1. In general, a round ends when the Director gives the signal for the start of the following round; but if any table has not completed play by that time, the round continues for that table until there has been a progression of players.
>>End quote

So according to the definitions, once a player has made a bid/call the board must be finished, Law 8B says so.

Otherwise a board(s) that has not been started on the current round it can be removed by the TD.