Willem

Hannie, I read the thread. It’s about the incident itself (and some other things). It’s not my intention to restart that discussion. But I don’t believe this matter can just fade away. There should be a follow-up (further investigations by WBF or EBL, maybe hearings and appeals, etc.). I was just wondering if anyone knows about it. That’s why I wrote my post.

We all know Andrea Buratti–Massimo Lanzarotti have been suspended during the European Championships, accused of illegal signalling. Does anyone knows what happened since? Was there an investigation? Did they appeal? Are they still on the Lavazza-team? I hardly can believe a top pair will use those methods, but if they did, they should be punished (I guess their sponsor will be the first to do so). If not, they should be back in international bridge soon.

This is great fun. It even speaks some kind of Dutch! Can the function of the voice be extended so it will say "duck that trick you idiot" or "lead a ♥ now"? It might improve my game :)

My line doesn't work

I don't think a sub should be forced/allowed to play an unfinished board. When someone subs during the play of a hand, I think the board should be over. The director then can award a score if things are clear, and Ave+ to both pairs if it is not.

I fully agree with Cherdano. Now almost all tournaments have a dollar sign or a lock sign. I think the lock sign should be reserved for really important information to the players about tournament restrictions, like country, language, level, clubmembers, etc.

If you are going to work on this, please also add a box "view only players willing to pay my entry fee" :lol:

Hi all, My director’s nick is “director1”, and I am running a tournament called “Saturday Night Fever Xpert Ximps” about every other Saturday (so twice a month) starting between 22.00 and 23.00 CET. The entrance is limited to players of Advanced Level and better. It’s a small tournament, usually 20 tables is the maximum, and I don’t charge a fee. For the second time now (latest last Saturday) I received a message from someone using the nick “ACBL” that my tournament is illegal. Before I had a chance to ask what the problem is, this person logged out. The message was: ACBL (Lobby): I am sorry but you cannot limit player skills like this. Games of this skill level are all schedule. Your game interfers with top flight game and this is not allow” (I have a screenshot of this message) I am running this tournament for many months now, I have a few regular customers who seem to like it, but I am getting worried. I organize this tournament because I have a great time on BBO and want to do something back for the BBO-community. I have no idea what could be illegal at what I am doing, but if I am violating any rule, I like to know what it is and where it is published. So maybe someone can enlighten me. I like everyone’s opinion, but especially from the BBO management. Willem

I totally disagree with Ben's post. East has the obligation to bid whatever (s)he would have bid without the hesitation. Often I hear people say to their partner: "I would have made a bid, but I can't anymore because you hesitated". That's false. In fact, if you raise your minimum for a call after your partner hesitated, THEN you could be using UI. In this particular case however, i won't be surprised if a pass by East is a logical alternative. But I should see the East-hand to decide. Remember, North passed and South openend a preempt. It won't take an Einstein East to figure out partner has points, hesitation or not.

Welcome to the Board, Netamin! Ben (Inquiry) is right. You need a "licence" to create tournaments. But any BBO-member can organize a team-of-4 match. I think it's a good way to start learning about hosting. Check http://www.bridgebase.com/help/english and click "Play Bridge"/"Team Matches"/"Create Team Match" to find out how to do this. And if you really want to be in the hosting-business, ask a experienced director to appoint you as a co-director in a few tournaments.

In the profiles I see name: .... email: ..... skill level: ..... not name: .... system: ..... skill level: ..... I am using BBO-version 3.7.3. I think it's one of the latest versions. I do believe adding "system" is a good idea. But since it's not there yet, I don't think you can blame anyone for not mention it. And many people use the "other" section to describe what they like to play.

I almost fully agree with Ben´s post, except on one part: I don't think play can continue after a claim, both f2f and online. After a claim the hand is over, and when disputed the director will have to decide. In this particular case, if play is continued after the claim has been rufused, declarer might figure out West took the first H-trick with the Ace when holding AQ, because of the refusal. In general, declarer should not be allowed to have extra information from a refused claim. Therefore the play should be over after a claim. And if West, in this case, did possess H AQ, I will award EW an extra trick, because the obvious play is to finesse (and here I agree with Ben again).

Of course the claim is valid (even having some doubts about declarers bridge-abilities looking at the bidding). No experienced director will refuse this one.

Looks like the mistake (originally the price was playing with a star in the individual tournament) is corrected. Too bad though it's no use for European players. 8.00 PM EST is in the middle of the night here.

The 1:00 PM EST June 7 is an individual tournament. So how is the star at disposal for the entire tourney? Maybe it's better Micky. When you only play two boards with the star you still have 10 boards left to recover :)