keithhus

I refer you to my question to mycroft. I had 9 hcp sitting 2nd. First bidder had 13 hcp and should have opened. If you feel I had an opportunity to bid then with respect I play a different system to you. All I am doing is pointing out where I feel the scoring system, in a specific instance, could be more equitable. I understand the points everyone has made and I appreciate there is no support for change but I still feel justified in raising the matter. Thanks for your response.

Moving the issue on a little, when is a bid a mis bid/illegal? I think I have been told 1 card/2 points outside declared range. At our club, we play standard ACOL unless announced/alerted. Hence, standard opening is 12-14 points. Bear in mind we do not psyche at our level. Thanks

I understand your point but the difference is that I did not have an opportunity to influence play.

Thank you and everyone else for troubling to respond. However, I am going to keep digging! I am not convinced this is equity; ask the man on the Clapham Omnibus. When a board is not played due to slow play on a previous board(s) an average score is given. The QB analogy is akin to the wrong card being discarded during play. I do not see this as similar to the board being passed out due to a bidding error, resulting in the hand - I.e. Game, not being played. I appreciate mistakes are made during play which affects the scoring and I accept that is part and parcel of the game. However, I still feel these specific circumstances are different and that the laws should allow discretion to award an average score, say if both pairs agree. I appreciate I am inexperienced, and that it's not going to happen, but at the moment, I still feel an average would be a fairer outcome. Thank you all once again, onward and upward (hopefully).

Thank you everyone for your responses, I suppose I'll find sympathy in the dictionary! To be fair, I probably would not have raised the matter if we had not scored 0 (dropped us a few places down the ladder). However that does not change the fact that in my opinion, the scoring is not equitable. No one should benefit to that degree from such a misbid and I would find no solace if it works in my favour next time. I still feel an average would be a better outcome. Thanks again everyone, I'll continue trying to learn from my mistakes.

Playing ACOL, Ops failed to open with 13 HCP (mistake, not tactical). Hand was passed out. We scored 0 bottom board, whilst Ops obviously scored top board. How can this be equitable? It has no reflection on either pair's play. Is this not a mis bid? Would it not be fairer to average ? I suppose you're going to tell me life's a bitch and then you die. Appreciate your comments/sympathy.

Helen, I agree re jump shift (I have noticed on BBO that people do it with 16 points) . However, in this example would that be the end of the bidding or should east go on to H4? Thanks

Thank you everyone for your explanation; very interesting indeed.

Out of interest, can you advise please when a pass is forcing. Saw it on BBO ACOL late last night. Thanks

Interesting point but from a beginners perspective (fwiw) I think the vulnerability adds to the bidding process. What I can't get my mind round is the points received for being dealt honours/aces in rubber bridge. I appreciate chance comes into duplicate (e.g. Cards dealt) but scoring is largely a result of "skill" or not as the case may be! Incidentally, we had a hand last week which was passed out, even though one of the Ops had 12 pts. Hence we scored nil. But, the hand was played by the Ops on the other tables and went down. Therefore, our Ops received top board and we got Bottom. I felt hard done by but I suppose that was the skill of our Ops. LoL

Z/V You both make valid points which I agree should be borne in mind when considering overall costs/processes but I am only a junior member. I understand upgraded computerisation has been discussed before and rejected! Possibly something to do with the demographics! However, that does not mean it should not remain on the agenda. The current thinking though, which I support, is to use funds to engage teachers to run sessions to improve the overall standard. One session has already been run, which was very successful (oversubscribed). Incidentally, all officers are volunteers. Thank you very much for your comments, much appreciated.

Thank you for the reply Peter. My timing is somewhat off as yesterday the committee told us there is a review taking place to reduce costs - e.g. Printing etc. I feel any suggestion to purchase additional hardware/software would go down like a lead balloon. One for the future hopefully.

Thank you all very much for responding; most helpful.

Just for my edification, could you tell me please what the correct procedure is when a card is discovered in the wrong hand - I.e. 12 in one and 14 in another. At my club, if it cannot easily be, corrected the board is averaged and hence forward. Re-dealing would complicate the scoring but that is the only other alternative I can see. Further, I was taught to count the cards prior to bidding but I think it might be better to count the cards after the hand is played and before returning to the board as this would identify the problem. Finally, is there any sanction on the pair(s) where the error ocurred? Please note I am a beginner and this question is only for my information. Thank you

I was a little worried when you mentioned "rules" and " deviation" but thanks for clarification.