JoAnneM

I like online bridge but I still like holding those 13 cards.

The reason I made the "playing bridge" comment is that frequently in forum posts there are posts that seem to argue that the non-offending side didn't play past the infraction, and they should have been able to do that, so they don't deserve an adjustment. But, if you look at the appeals that appear in the NABC Bulletins that is mostly not even an issue. So, I just wonder if it is too much of an issue in bridge forums.

Very interesting, Helene. I am pretty sure BridgePad has a learning curve for Directors, hence the training sessions at our club.

As an aside, the BridgePad machines can be rented, so I suppose the Bridgemate ones probably can be too. That might be a good way to select the right ones for your club.

As a Vugraph viewer, and one who had been critical (but to only one person) I also have really appreciated this thread. It has given me a good picture and a great appreciation of what actually goes on behind the computer screen. I especially like the posts that described all the activities (mental and physical) that a commentator has to handle at one time. To all the commentators who are still reading this thread - thanks for all you do.

My local club has used BridgePad at two recent games. One was a Mitchell movement and one was a Howell movement. We are a club of older players (of course) and with almost no instruction the first round was score flawlessly. Everyone took to it, with the other players at the table helping if necessary. By the second round everyone was an expert. I have no problem with the number of keystrokes. With each entry you must click "next", which allows you to backup if you have made a typo. Also, the first time we used them we did not have the e/w approval feature turned on and when I audited the scores (we used travelers as backup) there were a few incorrect entries, so that feature is vital. In a Howell movement it is important that the departing N/S pair clear their score by clicking "next" so the next pair sitting there won't see it. On the whole the impression was very favorable. Because we were using both methods of scoring it was a little slow. This was not a test for purchasing the machines, we are a very poor club, but I co-direct with one of the Tournament Directors out here in California who is beta-testing the machines at tournaments and they are going to use them at the Santa Clara Regional and he was "in-training". Since we are playing directors it is certainly nice to play the last round and then walk up to the computer and just click F8 to get the winners.

I am enjoying watching all of the Olympics. I just love sports and I don't let the broadcasting get in the way of it. I especially liked the womens marathon. The woman who won moved to Germany to get better treatment for her son who has Leukemia and so she is running for that country. I believe it was important financially for her to win so she got out in front and managed to stay there, then she actually took about 3 or 4 victory laps. I also liked the surprise wins like the womens discus and some of the rowing. I thought the events that were "judged" were probably pretty political within those sports. Also each sport has its own age limits based on the pyhsical strains put on the competitors. But I think that should be looked at by the Olympic Committee globally, not sport by sport. I guess I am a "glass half full" type, I don't sit around looking for the bad stuff, I am just having fun watching it.

I couldn't find further back than 6/30/07 when it was 68.17 so we seem to be aging about 6 months per year right now. At this rate we should all be dead in about 30 years or so.

I think it is important that after a situation like this that the weight of any decision be given to the damaged pair - as in deciding whether they "played bridge" after the MI. Expecting a damaged pair to do the "right" thing before awarding them an adjustment is, in my opinion, frequently unfair.

Wisdom usually comes with maturity.

"I don't suppose that you have any information about the rate of change in the mean membership age? What was the mean membership age in 2001? 2002? ..." I probably have that info, but it's time for primetime Olympics, so I will look in the morning.

In our District it was money from the Buffet-Gates Bridge Foundation (name?) that made bridge classes in the Hawaii schools possible with a very positive result. After a huge fundraising campaign by the Hawaiian Units 11 juniors were sent to Atlanta, some of them very new players, and they all earned points and had a great time. All it takes is a couple of dedicated volunteers (like Busaba Williams of Hawaii) to get these things going. Sorry I am preaching. :unsure:

As of 6/30 the average age in ACBL was 68.56. District 1 (eastern Canada) was youngest at 65.46, and District 9 (Florida) was oldest at 71.68. I don't know what the mean age was. My District is among the oldest at 69.70 but I am glad to say I am under that (barely). Alan Sontag's "The Bridge Bum" was one of the first bridge books I ever read and I still chuckle.

In an earleir thread I made the following suggestion: "Stop teaching players that psyches are unethical" Uday asked for specific examples where the ACBL was doing so. I referenced the old Don Oakie articles, but this provides a good example of the basic theme. Admittedly, I'm quite sure that Jo Anne - she of the "Practice Goodwill and Active Ethics" signature - was posting in a private capacity and not speaking as District 20 President. Then again, one of the major criticism of the ACBL is their inability to foster clear and unambiguous lines of communication. We don't have the equivalent of the Orange Book or the White Book. Rather, we have a random collection of semi official opinions, most of which don't actually have any legal standing (see previous threads regarding Duplicate Decisions) My post indicated that I thought this was a terrible psyche - especially for a team event. My error in my post was that I thought the poster made the bid, not his partner. And I think it is important to remember that you have teammates. I would like to know where in my post I showed disapproval of psyches, in general. I have nothing against psyches - except that I do not believe that they should be made by experts against novices. In fact at JBridge, a smaller bridge site some of you may have heard of, where I am an administrator, they have banned pyschic bids and I am the lone voice on their Forum that disagrees with that decision, and I have been quite vocal about it. I have some sympathy for the Director in that situation. Diffusing a "situation" that has become angry is not always easy and getting the player away from the table for a few moments was pretty smart. After that both sides needed to put that hand away and get on with the game. As a further comment to the status of District Presidents. Districts run Regionals and North American events. We run education and I/N programs. We occasionally host NABC's. We provide support to the Units, when asked, and we print a District publication. The President presides over a board that adminsters those activities. We do set our Regional entry fees, and do have some influence as to the game scheduling within a Regional but actually leave most of that to the experienced Tournament Manager and DIC. We do not micro-manage. The District Director from each District sits on the ACBL Board of Directors. That is the person who votes on rule changes, fees, etc, and makes ACBL descisions.

This is a team event? So you are do this to three people instead of just one partner? And how many other hands did you mastermind.

Of all the gripes that have been piled on me as a director, club manager, bridge administrator, etc. the scoring system has never been one of them. I agree with Jonottawa.

If there is no good way to actually deter someone who is bent on cheating maybe we should find a way to pre-determine who the cheaters will be and eliminate them from the games beforehand. Perhaps some kind of psychological testing required of all NABC+ entrants or even when you join the ACBL. Or even better, maybe the winners should take a lie detector test after the games. :) All tongue in cheek of course (I already got in trouble in another thread).

Good point - but the ones who don't care about anything are only that way until something doesn't go their way that they can't control, then they suddenly become the loudest voice. Or at least that is how it seems when I hear from players, in the position that I am currently holding.

Who is "us"?

I think that has to be an agreement between you and your club manager. A club manager can actually set the tone of how much "control" a director can exert, mostly in the area of assessing procedural penalties, allowing late plays, banning certain conventions, etc. Hopefully you have discussed these areas with your club management and have a firm understanding.

Actually I think you are embarking down a very slippery slope if in a ftf game you call a director to the table and accuse someone of cheating. You might find yourself shown the ACBL door. I believe the proper procedure is to file a report with the Recorder, who handles such delicate matters a little more discretely.

You call the director for something like this and everyone around you is going to hear it, especially since people tend to talk louder when they have a gripe. There is no penalty for bad bidding, and if they went down three what is your problem? Did I mention that every time the director is called to a table that the game is disturbed for every table around that table?

Don't rely on the police department to find it - quickly, that is. My parent's car was stolen. After four weeks the police did find it. The thieves had towed it from the restaurant my parents were at to a parking lot where they were collecting their loot (other stolen cars). In the meantime that same night the thieves were arrested. So, the car sat in that lot collecting parking tickets for one month before someone thought to run the tag. In the meantime my parents had purchased a new car. You might want to check parking lots.

I speak from experience from a club that dealt with a "jerk". We put up with him for quite a while and then noticed that we were losing some nice players. So, after one particularly bad incident we sent him a warning letter. That worked for a few weeks. Then one day he was playing against a mother-daughter novice pair and the bidding went 1c-p-1s-p-p-p and he came totally unglued, threw a tantrum and accused them of having a secret agreement. This was a pair that probably had no agreements. He was banned from the club for six months. That was three years ago, and we haven't had any trouble from him since. Those other players are back too. Putting up with bad behavior just encourages it.

The TD should have demanded that the player play the next two hands and when he refused then he should have been ejected from the game. This would not only ruin his partner's game, but would cause embarrassment as the movement is now 1/2 table short. The TD would have stood firm and would have been in charge, instead of the opponent. The threat of this might have allowed the next two hands to be played.