BudH

I had my own version of this while directing a club game back on January 22 regarding Boards 7 and 10 of the afternoon Common Game with the king of spades as the extra card. Board 7: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/common-game-2020-01-22-board-7/ Board 10: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/common-game-2020-01-22-board-10/ [hv=pc=n&s=sjt75hq9dat74cjt2&w=s9843hajt76d63ck8&n=skq62h82dj52cq953&e=sakhk543dkq98ca764]399|300|An extra spade king was in the East hand. P-P-P-1D-P-1H-P-3H(?)-all pass. Spade king led, Director called when spade king then appeared in dummy.[/hv] Less than 10 minutes into an 8x3 bye-stand relay (share) game, Table 3 calls me during their first board (Board 7). ♠K led by North against a 3♥ contract and I was called when the ♠K also appeared in dummy! Some severe underbidding by East caused them to stop in the partscore with an auction where East opened with a "balanced 19 points" and only raised the 1♥ response to 3♥. I removed the ♠K from dummy and declarer scored 11 tricks for 200. I did not adjust the score nor did I give a procedural penalty due to East not counting her cards. I then warned all the players to be very careful to count their cards and to especially watch for a hand with only 12 cards with green backs. But my warning was too late: [hv=pc=n&s=sahqj7543d82cat94&w=st8764hkdq73cqj82&n=s932ha986dkjtc53&e=sqj5ht2da9654ck76]399|300[/hv] At Table 4 on their first board (Board 10), North raised her partner's 1♥ opening bid to only 2♥ holding ♠932 ♥A986 ♦KJ10 ♣53 because she didn't realize she held only 12 cards and she should have been holding the ♠K that the East hand of Board 7 possessed (until I took it away at about the same time that Board 10 was being completed at Table 4). Of course, I can't count that result since there was never a time when all players held at least 13 cards. I gave A+ to the opponents and A- to the offenders, plus a tiny one matchpoint PP. (That was still better than the zero they thought they would receive!) We never did figure out how boards were made with our dealing machine ending with a card in the wrong directional pocket and in a board not even adjacent in number.

With my local ACBL club closing due to the coronavirus for the next two weeks (at least - and I expect it will be several weeks more than that), I am looking into how one would set up a small 3 to 8 table single section game with members of our club who have computer access and are willing to try playing online bridge with fellow club members, similar to the games we cannot (for now) play at our local bridge club face to face. I've been looking for instructions on how to set up such an "invitational" game but haven't found what I need for information thus far. I also haven't played on BBO myself for many years and do not have experience using the new web interface (I used the old Windows program). Where could one find instructions to set up a game on BBO with members of your local ACBL club while the club is not open?

A follow up to the new club Windows 10 computer: 1. Although I set it up to use Classic/Open Shell software to make it look very similar to Windows 10 if needed, I am not using that software. I did, however, remove nearly every tile in the Start Menu and replaced them with the half a dozen needed for the programs used to run a bridge game. I also added the quick launch bar that came with Windows XP which also includes those same half dozen shortcuts to required programs. And they are icons on the desktop. (So there are three different ways to start all the required programs.) 2. Mike Rothwell's excellent Bridge Timer was paid for by my club several years ago and is an excellent program. Unfortunately, having done a clean install on the new computer, I need a new activation code having removed the old computer from service, but can't make contact. So today, I set up the Duplicate Bridge Timer Rich Waugh's Duplicate Bridge Round Timer instead (although none of the other game directors at the club have ever used this program!). 3. The ACBLscore Windows 10 bug that crashes the program with a "parent directory" error message when on an initial screen to enter the game date and time is a problem because you need to know how to use Task Manager to kill the program, something I just taught our directors how to do this a few hours ago. 4. The function keys F2 through F11 has not been a problem using a standard wireless Logitech keyboard. However, we have had two occasions this week when the function keys stopped working, but after using alternate key strokes (like using Alt+L to bring up the Command List which is what F11 does), suddenly the function keys worked again. We still don't know why that happened. Still investigating. 5. I have not yet tried out the BridgeTD program from Ping Hu on Windows 10 which allows Bridgemates to be used with ACBLscore for a Swiss event. Hopefully I'll have an opportunity to try it out later this month.

When this happened at the table, there was a bit more to it. It was near the end of round, the room was noisier than usual, and declarer's RHO heard "small" and declarer told me he said "small heart". It was going to be the case of "he said, she said" and with the extra information that continuing diamonds was ridiculous, I ruled the heart could be played. But I deliberately left that other part out. I wanted to know the opinion without the aspect of the mishearing what was spoken. It appears to me the cases where dummy is leading to a trick are far less likely to allow Law 45C4(b) than other cases, and that declarer leading and dummy playing third to the trick are by far the most common cases where application of 45C4(b) is allowed.

Corrected: "At Trick 10, opening leader shifts to diamonds and DECLARER calls for dummy's ace with dummy holding.."

The specifics of the board (Board 33 of the Common Game, http://thecommongame.com/ClubWebHost/121624/191212A.html#board_results33, club ace opening lead from South) I don't think are that important to this question. At Trick 10, opening leader shifts to diamonds and declaarer calls for dummy's ace with dummy holding ♠---- ♥6 ♦A76 ♣---- The ♥6 is a winner. The ♦6 and♦7 are losers. After winning the ace in dummy, declarer says "small" or "play". Declarer's RHO plays a diamond and then I am called to the table, since declarer's intent was for the heart winner to be played, not a diamond loser. Assume declarer did not play to the trick, otherwise you cannot allow a correction for any reason. Law 463B(a) which says "in leading, declarer is deemed to have continued the suit with which dummy won the preceding trick provided there is a card of the designated rank in that suit", indicating saying "small" or "play" means the suit (diamonds) that won the trick is the suit to be led. Does 45C4(b) override this, allowing declarer to change dummy's card from the diamond loser to the heart winner? (In this case, playing one of the small diamonds would be clearly non-sensical.)

Yes, that one I am ready for this one. Not happy about it, but I think we'll be able to remember when nothing happens that we better "Tab" to highlight the time of day field! Oh, and sure enough, on my Windows laptop I must have accidentally hit "Fn" and the Esc key simultaneously. As some had suggested, all I needed to do was do the same thing again and it reversed it back to normal. I am surprised, however, that it still did this after the computer was off and on. So after I send this message, I'm going to check the BIOS settings.

I’ll try running Microsoft’s program again to check for Windows 10 compatability, and I’ll also check explicitly and separately on the integrated graphics card. And I’ll see if I can make Windows 10 (without the use of a touch screen which we don’t use) appear useable to our game directors without using the Classic Shell program.

Thanks, Ed. I didn’t really know where to put the post, either! But we often have mentioned the workings of Bridgemates and assocuated software and those aren’t laws or rulings topics. Perhaps a forum on everything OTHER than laws and rulings (computer use and set up, game movements, differences between club directing and tournament directing, how to quickly seed and balance the field, Bridgemates, Bridgepads, Dealer4, Duplimate, ACBLscore and other scoring software, displaying final results on the web including ACBL forcing Live for Clubs on ACBL clubs, etc.) would be appropriate?

I agree with keeping as many default options as you can. For the function keys, I’ll bet their default is “normal” for the new HP desktop. I probably made an accidental change on my personal Dell laptop. One necessary change I can’t avoid is making it look close to Windows 7. My personal experience is that I gave the default appearance of Windows 10 a try for a full month and my dislike for the appearance never disappeared, so I used Classic Shell to make it look like Windows 7 again. The other game directors at this club would not be able to handle the default Windows 10 interface. My guess is that would be common for many clubs and their game directors.

I seem to remember two years ago when I did a clean install on the 2010 Gateway that I tried Windows 10 and it said it was incompatible. I think it might be the integrated graphics that caused Windows 10 to not be useable. The processor and memory look like they meet requirements.

My apologies initially for putting this post in this forum - but it does directly affect game directors for ACBL clubs, and probably others outside ACBL. My local ACBL club, as will be true for other clubs, is using Windows 7 on an old computer and Microsoft ends Windows 7 support this January. So it's time to switch to Windows 10 and in my case, the old computer doesn't support Windows 10, so it's also time for a new club desktop computer! In my case, I recently purchased one and it looks like a great deal for $360 plus tax for an HP Slim Desktop with 8 GB RAM, 256 GB solid state drive, 1 TB regular hard drive, and i3 Intel processor. ----------------------------------------- Old computer: Gateway DX4831-01e, purchased 26 April 2010 for $560, Windows 7 Home Premium, Intel i3 CPU @ 2.93GHz, 6 GB RAM, 500 GB hard drive New computer: HP Slim Desktop S01-pF0135t, purchased 24 November 2019 for $360, Windows 10 Home Premium (November 2019 build 1909), Intel i3-9100, 3.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD & 1 TB 7200 rpm SATA hard drive ----------------------------------------- MY MISSION - make this new computer look like and work nearly EXACTLY like the old computer so nearly computer illiterate game directors can run a game seamlessly with no issues. (I likely will be using a program called "Classic Shell" to make it look like Windows 7.) The primary reason for this post is the ACBLscore function keys and how they work when using Windows 10. On my personal (fairly new) Dell laptop computer running Windows 10, I have to use the "Fn" function key simultaneously with the desired function key. If you forget, weird things happen like screens getting brighter or dimmer with the F10 and F11 keys. Does anyone know any way to get ACBLscore to recognize using Windows 10 the function keys without needing to press any other key simultaneously? Also, if any of you have any advice on anything involved with switching your club's computer to Windows 10 (and making it look and feel and work like Windows 7), please let me and the rest of us know. I will keep everyone apprised of my mission in the next week. (I'm on vacation the next two weeks - which is why I'm doing this now for my local club before the Windows 7 support ends in January.) Sorry for the length of this post! Bud

A BIT is unauthorized information to that person's partner. But in this case, it is clear that you as the player's partner had no unauthorized information since this is approximately the amount of time this player takes AFTER cards are sorted and starts deciding what call to make. From your description of "roughly 5-7 seconds before she considered her call and another 4-5 seconds before she made the call", that is starting to stretch the limits, even for a known slow player. But I still would not rule this unauthorized information from what you have said. And I suggest you perform the extraneous duties, not your partner, in the interest of all to keep the game moving!

He has both a ♠A and a ♥A entry to dummy after leading low to his ♥K and then starting his club plays from the top.

I admit after some significant thought that I allowed 12 tricks to be claimed. I thought this was a close decision and the club split plus not seeing the ♣10 plus the fortunate dummy entry still available were factors in my decision. Can someone point me to a source for either EBU or especially ACBL guidance about whether declarer is allowed to notice when either defender shows out on the line of play he describes, and using that information. (I do seem to remember a claimer is allowed to notice an opponent showing out of a suit making a finesse a certainty through the other opponent.)

I don't balance as much as I should, but especially if there are special overall awards, I verify the top two to three EW pairs are not missing the top two or three NS pairs. (10 and 11 table Mitchells are where this happens frequently.)

[hv=pc=n&s=skt7hkqtdt9ckqj83&w=sj62h84dq7cat7654&n=sa95ha97dakj854c9&e=sq843hj6532d632c2&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1dp3np6nppp]399|300[/hv] Against 6NT, the ♣A is led followed by a spade switch to the 5, Q, and K. At trick 3, declarer leads the ♦10 and passes it, followed by the ♦9, Q, A, 3. Now declarer claims, saying, "throwing a spade loser on the king of diamonds, heart to my hand, and my clubs are good". "Director, please!" This happened in a moderate size club game with slightly below average quality players. The declarer in this case is a reasonable Flight B type player, better than the average player at this club. What would be your ruling on how many tricks you allow declarer to score? And why? If it matters, also describe if your ruling would change if the player was an expert or "near expert".

Law 12C2(d): "The Regulating Authority may provide for circumstances where a contestant fails to obtain a result on multiple boards during the same session. The scores assigned for each subsequent board may be varied by regulation from those prescribed in (a) and (b) above." Ed, this appears crystal clear to me in the new laws. Due to this, I urged my local club as the "Regulating Authority" to have all missed boards be scored as average if more than the equivalent of one round of boards is missed. As for ACBL tournament play (or the EBL, EBU, ABF, or other major national bridge organization), I have not been able to find (yet) a definitive answer. I did find the ABF has supposedly not made a determination yet but may soon in the future.

From commentary on the 2017 laws, page 6: http://www.worldbridge.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2017LawsCommentary.pdf Average plus - The new Law 12C2(d) allows a Regulating Authority to specify what happens when a pair misses several boards during a session. The WBF Laws Committee recommends average plus not be used simply for a sit-out in a movement, and it suggests restricting average plus to two boards per session for a contestant (at pairs or teams). Additional missed boards can be scored as average or, in extreme situations, as if they were not scheduled to be played in the first place. Effective: January 2019, Updated: January 2019 I've seen guidance about giving average plus for perhaps the first two at most occurrences, then average for all the rest after that. Probably fairer for all to get average. At least that's fairer than a whole bunch of average plusses.

At matchpoints, having passed as dealer, and able to correct 3♣ to 3♦ if desired, I can't imagine 10 to 15% (or more) selecting pass, so I don't believe passing is a logical alternative.

This was recently addressed on Bridgewinners. If you look at the pre-2017 law wording (much clearer) and also the official commentary on the 2017 law changes (example 3 in http://www.worldbridge.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2017LawsCommentary.pdf ), it is clear that dummy has the same rights as the other players to inform partner of an incorrectly pointed quitted trick card prior to his side playing a card to the next trick.

ACBLscore and Bridgmates do not “get along” well when running team events! A week from today, I’ll be using for the first time running a club DupliSwiss Ping Hu’s BridgeTD program which serves as a “bridge” (pun intended) between ACBLscire and the Bridgemate software. Our local sectional’s Sunday DupliSwiss in early August will use the same software.

“Dupli-Swiss” is a common USA term for a Swiss where all matches each round use the same boards. For my 24 table example, another method which I prefer is to treat my 12 tables A1 through A12 as a 12-table Mitchell pair game section starting with two boards on each table (1-2,3-4,5-6,7-8,1-2,3-4,5-6,7-8,1-2,3-4,5-6,7-8) with boards passed to the next lower table until all eight boards are completed. Similar for the “B” tables.

I'll give you an example of what likely will happen in the early August ACBL sectional tournament in South Bend, Indiana: 1. 6 rounds, 8 boards per round, 24 teams, using Tables A1 through A12 and B1 through B12. 2. Tables are grouped in 4-table groups (A1-A4, A5-A8, A9-A12 and the same for the B tables.) 3. Each group of four tables has a set of boards. In Round 1, A1 through A4 start with Boards 1-2 on A1, 3-4 on A2, 5-6 on A3, and 7-8 on A4. After completing two boards, they are passed to the next lower table. All tables play boards in ascending order, either 12345678, 34567812, 56781234, or 78123456. 4. ACBL's scoring software ACBLscore does not "play nice" with Bridgemate. I am learning how to use new software (BridgeTD) which will work with the Bridgemates to allow electronic scoring with the Bridgemate system and it coordinates with ACBLscore with proper result information transferred. I suspect other areas of the world find it much easier with team events to use Bridgemates.

Running a "Dupli-Swiss" at both my local club and upcoming in a sectional ACBL tournament in early Auguet, we typically have 6-board matches at the club and likely 8-board matches in the upcoming sectional tournament. In the 8-board case, for Round 1, a group of four tables shares the 8 boards, so each table plays the boards in order 12345678, 34567812, 56781234, and 78123456. It has been a struggle to get players to keep quiet, especially upon completion of a board. I think it will be easier for no result to be spoken when we hopefully soon are using electronic scoring (Bridgemates) for the data entry, so the contract and result will be on the Bridgemate table unit and should not even need to be spoken verbally following the play.