[khaki]

bearmum, on Jul 1 2005, 05:57 AM, said:

I just feel grateful that there are so many directors willing to run free tourneys

grateful.... yup, but only for those TRUE tourney DIRECTORs, not for those tourney(or trouble!) "CREATORs" (even though the troubles are FREE )

[khaki]

jillybean2, on Jun 30 2005, 09:49 AM, said:

tony stack, on Jun 29 2005, 09:11 PM, said:

Bridge is just a CARD game you play for FUN.

True but irrelevant

& I’m not sure if it is all about winning, I think people want a FAIR game.

Tournaments that run with playing directors have (more!) problems with deliberate hold up play, talk at table, mis alerted, non alerted bids and so on….. it is no longer bridge and I certainly don’t call it fun!

jillybean

Totally agree!!!

With a playing TD tourney, even you read the description or rules (I usually read them all) before signup, even you are a relaxing player that doesn't take winning and losing serious... some impromptu unpleasant "hiccups", e.g. being booted cos of opp's false charge or getting ave- for every board cos of slow opps , may break your good mood. Subbing stuck players, trying to figure out the problem and make a relative FAIR decision should be a TD's basic duties, which are hard for a playing TD. I guess majority of tourney players need a true tourney director with them, not a sole tourney creator. Otherwise, like I stated previously, BBO should set "Create Tournament" as a common feature to every members. maybe memebers who lack of directing knowledge can invite experienced directors to direct their tourney (a way for TDs to make $$$?... I'm kidding)

[Gweny]

in past I play in tournaments i direct and then come to realize that everyone - my partner, my opps, and others in my tournament are suffering because I am playing...

So now if i want to play i limit it to like 8 tables, post it in description, and watch very close.

I do think if td is going to play they may not get more than very small number of tables.

However, in general, i think it is better idea that tds never play when they direct

[pierreD]

i am very disapointed cause when TD playing we cannot ask for a sub and so manytime partner or opp are stuck like 5 mins ore more and we cannot do anything just wait. I remeber one time the boths opps were red and i was waiting for more than 10 mins bellow 0 , i try to disconnect and back of course was back with 15 bellow 0 in the same table with the same reds opps. I think this kind of disagreement doesn't to de allowed in BBO THANKS

[nafiz]

No, never ...

i am totally against playing TD Ts since i am one of the guys who continuously receiving complaints about.

nafiz

[candybar]

No, never ...

i am totally against playing TDs since i am one of the people who continuously complains to nafiz about them.

(Just kidding, nafiz, but most of them really are useless, and deserve complaining about)

[mink]

sceptic, I think this is not a good idea, because the number of tables a playing or non-playing TD can handle depends greatly on the kind of people who are playing there (e. g. if they are all German and can communicate in German there are much less problems) and the reliablity of the players' connections. And if all players belong to a community such as BIL or Satto there is not much work for a TD - except when BBO crashes while the tourney is running as it happened during the last round of my last BIL tourney. Maybe there is an upper limit of tables a playing TD can handle, but this is fairly high if all other conditions are very favorable and can be found out by experience only. It also depends a lot on the TD's abillities.

Karl

[candybar]

At the very least, REQUIRE them to post that the TD is playing!

If the tournament description doesn't say playing TD, I even go so far as to check the list of registered players looking for the host/TD name. TWICE today, the TD was playing, didn't post it, and registered at the last second, so I was stuck twice in tournaments that were total chaos.

I say forbid playing TDs entirely, but if that is not going to happen, then at least force them to let the players know ahead of time, please!

[jikl]

Come play in my Tourneys candybar, the first line in the description is always the same: Non-playing TD.



Sean

[candybar]

jikl, on Aug 29 2005, 10:35 PM, said:

Come play in my Tourneys candybar, the first line in the description is always the same: Non-playing TD.

I probably do, Sean

I look for tourneys that have a real (non-playing) TD, allow all systems and, of course, psyches, and have proper spelling and grammar in the description and rules (this latter helps identify those TDs who actually do care about what they are doing).

That combination is not always easy to find, but there are some good ones out there. The annoying part is when it's not posted that a TD is playing, or doesn't allow opening 1N bids with singletons, or doesn't allow psyches, etc, and you don't find out until you are stuck in some chaotic mess for 12 boards.

[Dwingo]

candybar, on Aug 30 2005, 06:37 PM, said:

I look for tourneys that have a real (non-playing) TD, allow all systems and, of course, psyches, and have proper spelling and grammar in the description and rules (this latter helps identify those TDs who actually do care about what they are doing).

That combination is not always easy to find, but there are some good ones out there. The annoying part is when it's not posted that a TD is playing, or doesn't allow opening 1N bids with singletons, or doesn't allow psyches, etc, and you don't find out until you are stuck in some chaotic mess for 12 boards.

My tourneys for eg. has the information, whether TD is playing or not. Invariably I have the Rules of the tourney uploaded, which no one reads.

However, I am not going to explicitly state in the conditions of contest, that psyches are welcome. This will be an invitation to disaster, IMHO, from the TD's point of view. This said and done, I feel that if a TD prohibits psyches, then the same should be notified in the Tourney Rules.

Godwin

[candybar]

Dwingo, on Aug 30 2005, 07:09 PM, said:

However, I am not going to explicitly state in the conditions of contest, that psyches are welcome.

No one "welcomes" psyches. And contrary to what readers of this forum may suspect, I very, very rarely do one. I hate to be psyched out of a good contract -- I'm sure everyone does. But they are legal by the Laws of Duplicate Bridge.

I don't think it's necessary to post that you welcome, or even that you allow, psyches in the tournament description, any more than it is necessary to post that you allow 1N openings, or any other legal calls.

But I do think it's extremely necessary to post if you do not allow them.
It's extremely necessary to post if you are going to play instead of being a real TD.
It's extremely necessary to post if you are making up your own 'rules' for a new game, instead of playing Bridge.

If you don't post that you are a 'playing TD', if you don't post your oddball 'rules', if you don't make it clear BEFOREHAND that you are not going to do the director's job, or not going to follow the Laws, and you somehow suck me into your tournament, prepare to be told off bluntly.

[jillybean]

fwiw – as a large number of tournaments prohibit psyches I DO state psyches allowed, I also state kibitzers allowed

I get the very occasional call about a psyche, my tournaments have yet to attracted the dreaded group of habitual ‘psychers’. If a psyche or responding bid looks odd I will usually follow up on it and if it turns out the players were bidding illegally in someway they will be blacklisted and reported to abuse. I suspect this sort of player is going to disrupt tournaments, psyches allowed or not.

jb

[Gerben42]

Quote

No one "welcomes" psyches. And contrary to what readers of this forum may suspect, I very, very rarely do one. I hate to be psyched out of a good contract -- I'm sure everyone does. But they are legal by the Laws of Duplicate Bridge.

I welcome psyches. Go right ahead and lie. But if psycher's partner magically fields the psyche that's cheating, be sure to call a director.