[jw_nl]

After reading the 'How do I rule' thread a next ruling.

Kibitzing a tournament I saw the following happen :

Scoring: -

---

West North East South

-- Pass Pass Pass
1♦ Pass 3♦ Pass
3♥ Pass 3♠ Pass
3NT Pass Pass Pass



♠ for the K, with ♥6 to the dummy, ♦J for the K, ♠ for the Ace, 4 ♦ tricks, finessing ♥Q 10 tricks made

I couldn't see possible private chat between TD and players of course. It's rather obvious there has been one.

EAST: bravo
NORTH: pls explaine 3S
WEST: typ
NORTH: ..)))))))))
EAST: stop in spades ace
NORTH: we ll play poker here???????
WEST: y North
NORTH: this can be when was alerted..
EAST: sorry
WEST: lead sp..
->KIB: Automated message: Director TD is now at the table as requested by EAST
EAST: do not accept av ok
WEST: td lead sp
EAST: ok find other player for me i do not like to play now ok
TD: on spades bid by 2 pieces is lack of alert
WEST: but lead sp
HOST: what is going on here?
EAST: is ok if North like to have score i thank him for that
TD: ok i am giving you a warning if you are leaving upon protest of my decision you will not join anymore tourneys
NORTH: not score is important here but not etic
NORTH: is a fair play game..

EAST left the table.
Myhands showed A+-

In another thread I read Hotshot's suggestion :
3) TD ruling charts
Now that the BBO-Software can open a HTML-Window, we should prepare ruling charts.
The ruling chart should show the workflow a TD should follow to make a ruling. This chart could be translated in different languages.
Even TD's with limited skills should be able to follow that chart.
It might be possible to display this chart to the players (in their own language) so that they can understand, what the TD is doing.

I like this idea very much. It has to be possible to get a group of TD's who are willing to cooperate in discussing and producing these TD ruling charts. If you are interested please contact me on BBO.

Jan Willem Beek,
jw_nl

[Walddk]

jw_nl, on Apr 11 2005, 09:10 AM, said:

After reading the 'How do I rule' thread a next ruling.

Kibitzing a tournament I saw the following happen :

Scoring: -

---

West North East South

-- Pass Pass Pass
1♦ Pass 3♦ Pass
3♥ Pass 3♠ Pass
3NT Pass Pass Pass



♠ for the K, with ♥6 to the dummy, ♦J for the K, ♠ for the Ace, 4 ♦ tricks, finessing ♥Q 10 tricks made

I couldn't see possible private chat between TD and players of course. It's rather obvious there has been one.

EAST: bravo
NORTH: pls explaine 3S
WEST: typ
NORTH: ..)))))))))
EAST: stop in spades ace
NORTH: we ll play poker here???????
WEST: y North
NORTH: this can be when was alerted..
EAST: sorry
WEST: lead sp..
->KIB: Automated message: Director TD is now at the table as requested by EAST
EAST: do not accept av ok
WEST: td lead sp
EAST: ok find other player for me i do not like to play now ok
TD: on spades bid by 2 pieces is lack of alert
WEST: but lead sp
HOST: what is going on here?
EAST: is ok if North like to have score i thank him for that
TD: ok i am giving you a warning if you are leaving upon protest of my decision you will not join anymore tourneys
NORTH: not score is important here but not etic
NORTH: is a fair play game..

EAST left the table.
Myhands showed A+-

In another thread I read Hotshot's suggestion :
3) TD ruling charts
Now that the BBO-Software can open a HTML-Window, we should prepare ruling charts.
The ruling chart should show the workflow a TD should follow to make a ruling. This chart could be translated in different languages.
Even TD's with limited skills should be able to follow that chart.
It might be possible to display this chart to the players (in their own language) so that they can understand, what the TD is doing.

I like this idea very much. It has to be possible to get a group of TD's who are willing to cooperate in discussing and producing these TD ruling charts. If you are interested please contact me on BBO.

Jan Willem Beek,
jw_nl

OK, East did not alert 3♠ which he should have although he had denied 4 spades long time ago, but again NS have not been damaged by the missing alert. There is only one proper ruling: Table result stands. Then the TD can tell East that he must alert a feature bid in the future.

End of story.

Roland

[hrothgar]

Silly question... I'm trying to get a complete picture regarding what happened...

I am assuming from the report that East/West was assigned an average minus, after which East left the table?

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Apr 11 2005, 09:20 AM, said:

Silly question... I'm trying to get a complete picture reagrding what happened...

I am assuming from the report that East/West was assigned an average minus, after which East left the table?

I think you are right Richard, and that is of course unacceptable no matter how wrong the decision was. Finish the tourney and don't play in any of that TD's tourneys again.

Roland

[jw_nl]

Sorry Richard, I don't have more info.

13 tricks played. Result 3N+1.
There is no damage at all. North did lead spades.
A very small warning to East. Does North expect 4 spades at East after 3♦?
West was lucky, he had 4♥ .
Leaving the table after a possible priv chat of TD is not OK, but why will the TD change the result too? Blacklisting is OK imo.

Jan Willem

[inquiry]

What the heck was North complaining about on the jw_nl? This is normal bridge, no alert on 3♠ really needed, but even if needed, no possible harm. Table result stands.

[hrothgar]

First comment:

I very much like the suggestion that we create some type of Wizard or template that novice Directors could use in their rulings. There are a few issues that would need to be sorted out. In particular, precisely which set of regulations should be adopted (Different Zonal bodies have different interpretations of certain aspects of the Laws). There is the potential that a work flow diagram that was appropriate for ACBL events might not necessarily yield correct rulings for BBO Italia events...

With this said and done, the differences are probably relatively minor.

I'll volunteer to send a posting to the the Bridge Laws mailing list. With luck, one or more of the existing regulatory bodies might have matterials that we could adapt...

Second comment:

I still think that we need a feedback structure by which users can evaluate the performance of Tournament Directors. While I agree that East should not have left the tournament, the ruling was a travesty and I have some sympathy for a player deciding not to continue wasting their time participating in the event. More importantly, as a player, I'd like to know which director perpetrated the ruling in question...

[olegru]

inquiry, on Apr 11 2005, 10:48 AM, said:

What the heck was North complaining about on the jw_nl? This is normal bridge, no alert on 3♠ really needed, but even if needed, no possible harm. Table result stands.

Probably North was complaining, because he didn't know too much about bridge and even less about bridge rules and ethics. It is not a problem. He, probably, was not pretending to be an expert on bridge rules.
But director does. Noblesse oblige. And his ruling is far beyond believable.
I know just a few people here. But I already know two who stop playing BBO tornaments after adjasting like this.
Problem is if player just starts to play on BBO, and meet TD like this, he doesn't know this TD is unlucky exception.

[Walddk]

olegru, on Apr 11 2005, 11:20 AM, said:

Problem is if player just starts to play on BBO, and meet TD like this, he doesn't know this TD is unlucky exception.

Are you sure that this is an exception? I am sorry, but it is not! Most TDs/hosts on BBO are, excuse me, clueless as far as the laws are concerned. No one in the world knows all of them by heart, word by word, and that is not required either.

What is required, however, is that TDs know where to look them up and rule accordingly!

We have discussed this before, but it's a fact that most TDs are busy with nothing more than trying to keep the time and "where do I get my next substitute from".

Having said that, I would like to stress that there is no excuse whatsoever for leaving a tourney, no matter how appalling the ruling is. If this happened in real life, a suspension would be automatic.

And then we are back to the issue appeals committee or not. You have one in f2f bridge, but we don't have any on BBO.

Roland

[Gerben42]

I doubt TD flowcharts are going to help against TDs who make these kinds of decisions. This is about judgement, which appear to be absent with both North and the TD.

The question that needs to be answered here is: "Was North damaged by the lack of alert of 3♠." I agree with others that the answer to this is No. It is no good if the TD can look up the question but fail to answer the question. This is why TDs must have a certain Bridge level.

If I were you I'd just blacklist the TD and North and get on with life.

Second comment: These things never seem to happen to me. But then again, I would always alert and write "stopper" the 3♠ bid. It is your duty to do so.

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Apr 11 2005, 05:36 PM, said:

Are you sure that this is an exception? I am sorry, but it is not! Most TDs/hosts on BBO are, excuse me, clueless as far as the laws are concerned. No one in the world knows all of them by heart, word by word, and that is not required either.

What is required, however, is that TDs know where to look them up and rule accordingly!

No, there is no such thing among the requirements to becoming a BBO TD as far as I know. They are NOT f2f TDs. You have no reason to have the same expectations as you would have from a club TD in real life.

In fact, you KNOW by now what to expect from BBO TDs, and if you don't like it, don't play there. End of story.

Quote

We have discussed this before, but it's a fact that most TDs are busy with nothing more than trying to keep the time and "where do I get my next substitute from".
(...)
And then we are back to the issue appeals committee or not. You have one in f2f bridge, but we don't have any on BBO.

Your statement about f2f bridge is of course wrong in that generality. In the clubs I play in, I have NEVER seen an appeals comittee. And I take BBO tourneys less seriously than playing in a club.

Arend

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Apr 11 2005, 11:54 AM, said:

And I take BBO tourneys less seriously than playing in a club.

Arend

Yes, I take bridge in general seriously, because it is my living. I think that is a valid point. You are entitled to take it less seriously of course.

Roland

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Apr 11 2005, 07:36 PM, said:

And then we are back to the issue appeals committee or not. You have one in f2f bridge, but we don't have any on BBO.

I'm skeptical whether Appeals committees on BBO are either necessary or desirable...

Ultimately, the results of 99% of all BBO tournaments don't matter. Introducing a formal appeals process wouldn't really add much value. Some events on BBO do offer some type of prizes (Either monetary or Masterpoints). Here's ts possibile that some players might get wound up sufficiently that they would want to appeal a TD's rulings. Here, however, I'd argue that any appeals process should be the responsibility of the the same regulatory structure running the event. For example, if you are competing in an ACBL event, than the ACBL has the responsibility of determining an appropriate appeals process...

Ultimately, I believe that the market will be self-policing. Bad directors will alienate potential consumers and cease to offer tournaments. Good directors will establish a positive reputation. However, an operational market economy requires a free flow of information...

In short, we need names.

[epeeist]

jw_nl, on Apr 11 2005, 09:10 AM, said:

....
->KIB: Automated message:  Director TD is now at the table  as requested by EAST
....

I'm assuming you cut and paste this, so it's not a typo.

Unless the directions are mixed up -- and the rest of the questions suggest not, given that North asked about 3♠ -- it was EAST, who made the bid that should have been alerted, that called the TD. So there seems to be something missing from the story, problems previous board or rounds also, or maybe insults or refusal to answer questions or something?

[guggie]

well bridge is my hobby not my job but I take it seriously too.

But I am a TD without any formal knowledge of the rules, who does indeed arrange substitutes, minds the time, goes to tables where people complain and rules mainly by common sense. Luckily it is not possible to lead from the wrong hand and so on, spares a lot of complicated rulings. So far I have managed to keep 99,99% of the players in my tournaments happy. Maybe it is helpful they are received in Mrs. Guggenheims parlour and dont expect too much;-)

If people like me were not allowed to TD, BBO would have far less tourneys. I would GREATLY object to read through pages full of dull juridical jargon (this is an eufemism for that i surely will not read them), although i read all posts on ruling.

[cherdano]

Walddk, on Apr 11 2005, 05:59 PM, said:

cherdano, on Apr 11 2005, 11:54 AM, said:

And I take BBO tourneys less seriously than playing in a club.

Yes, I take bridge in general seriously, because it is my living. I think that is a valid point. You are entitled to take it less seriously of course.

Maybe I should clarify. I take them seriously as in trying to play my best. But I don't take them seriously as in not caring about the result. That's why I wouldn't care about a wrong TD ruling.
Do you really care much about the result?

Arend

[Walddk]

guggie, on Apr 11 2005, 12:15 PM, said:

well bridge is my hobby not my job but I take it seriously too.

But I am a TD without any formal knowledge of the rules, who does indeed arrange substitutes, minds the time, goes to tables where people complain and rules mainly by common sense. Luckily it is not possible to lead from the wrong hand and so on, spares a lot of complicated rulings. So far I have managed to keep 99,99% of the players in my tournaments happy. Maybe it is helpful they are received in Mrs. Guggenheims parlour and dont expect too much;-)

If people like me were not allowed to TD, BBO would have far less tourneys. I would GREATLY object to read through pages full of dull juridical jargon (this is an eufemism for that i surely will not read them), although i read all posts on ruling.

I am sure you do a great job guggie, and now readers in the Forums know where you come from. If they are unhappy about the fact you don't necessarily make the correct rulings, they can just stay away from your tourneys.

You should certainly be allowed to run tourneys, because there is nothing at stake, other than pride, in your tourneys. In other tourneys they compete for cash prizes, and in those instances I think it is a must that TDs rule according to the Laws of Duplicate Bridge.

But how can they do that if they don't know what the laws stipulate? Some know, others don't.

Roland

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Apr 11 2005, 12:31 PM, said:

Do you really care much about the result?

Arend

Of course I care about the result. Not only because it affects me and my partner, but don't forget that our result also affects all the other pairs in the tournament.

Therefore a ruling should be as accurate as possible under the circumstances. If you don't care about the result in a tourney, why do you play there at all?

Roland

[jw_nl]

epeeist, on Apr 11 2005, 12:04 PM, said:

jw_nl, on Apr 11 2005, 09:10 AM, said:

....
->KIB: Automated message:  Director TD is now at the table  as requested by EAST
....

I'm assuming you cut and paste this, so it's not a typo.

Unless the directions are mixed up -- and the rest of the questions suggest not, given that North asked about 3♠ -- it was EAST, who made the bid that should have been alerted, that called the TD. So there seems to be something missing from the story, problems previous board or rounds also, or maybe insults or refusal to answer questions or something?

I replaced the names of the players by NSEW, the name of the TD by TD, the name of the host by HOST and my name by KIB. So EAST was angry about the remarks of NORTH and called TD.
It was the first board of the tournament. Nothing happened before (at least during this tournament).

jw

[jillybean]

hrothgar, on Apr 11 2005, 09:09 AM, said:

I still think that we need a feedback structure by which users can evaluate the performance of Tournament Directors. 

How would you protect against this becoming a free for all TD bashing forum? I remove a player from my tournament for unacceptable behavior (as stated in tournament description) but which he/she finds perfectly acceptable. Surely I am free to run my tournaments how I see fit as long as I keep within the rules of BBO? .

Perhaps for paid TD’s this would be acceptable, not for free tourneys.

I do like the idea of a rookie TD flow chart.

jillybean