candybar

Wanna hear another amazing story? Today a TD openly admitted that she was PLAYING on one account while TDing the same tournament on another account. I didn't think this was even possible, and I certainly can't imagine that it is allowed.

I would like to be able to see a summary of IMPs, MPs, etc, hand results without seeing all the individual hands, just the last 3 lines that give the totals. This would save a lot of bandwidth and load time as well.

As far as I have been able to find out, the bbofriends TD stuff is defunct.

And I'm here killing time by reading the forum because the Sky Club tournament I'm registered for is delaying over and over ... it was originally supposed to start 7 minutes ago, had 3 delays by resetting the time from 1 minute to 3 minutes. Can't tell you who the TD is because the tourney description says "TD: ". Ah, there, it finally started 8 minutes late. (pause while bidding the first hand) And the TD is (drum roll) ........ Zmey!

Despite your statement a couple weeks ago that you would end it, I saw a Sky Club tourney in the last 2 or 3 days that still said "no opening NT with singleton". I didn't play in it so I don't know who the TD was.

The actual hands are totally irrelevant. Was there misexplanation of the agreement (then adjust), or a misbid by someone who forgot the actual agreement (then no adjustment).

shoeless, if you would put together such a casebook, list those things you know about or have seen in the forum, and email it to me, I'll find a way to make it available to everyone.

LOL, no, I only use one name for directing, it was just a typo. :) :P :) :D

I had an interesting situation too, my own fault. I actually misspelled my own name in the TD spot of the tournament setup. So I was there, but when people called the TD, it said No TD Available. It took several private messages asking me what was going on before I finally figured it out.

Not to worry, rigour, I've been flamed much worse than anything you wrote. I just try to see if it is legitimate issues or just a personal attack, and ignore the latter. Your points were completely legitimate, whether or not we agree on all of them. <_< A good idea, provided it is not publicized to players, but just used as feedback to the TD him/herself. Hopefully, such feedback would serve two purposes, (1) help the TD to realize how others view him/her, and (2) motivate improvement. I wouldn't want to see a public rating system, as much as I might like to have one, because it would be a constant source of controversy and would threaten TDs more than encourage them to improve. I'd prefer that it be a more positive encouraging approach.

I DID pay, but I won't again, and for the record, it has EVERYTHING to do with the quality of the rulings in the event.

I had been thinking of running two tournaments in parallel, one pairs and one individual, but hadn't tried it yet, so I didn't realize it was not allowed. Since I am frequently twiddling my thumbs during most of a tourney that I TD, I may ask permission to try it, but before I do, I'd appreciate hearing more detail about the possible problems and how to avoid them.

Jilly, how does one know that a tournament is "terrible" or that the TD is "clueless" unless the tournament description is accurate? Uday told me that there are over 1000 TDs authorized in BBO. Must I play with each one of them to find out if they are competent? Must each person who wants a good tournament with a capable TD play with each one of them to find out? Wouldn't it be better to have some standards in the first place, or some kind of "seal of approval" showing that they at least know the Laws, try to follow them, and know how to do the TD job?

I think the problem is not predealt, but failing to post that it is predealt in the tournament description. IF someone doesn't want to play predealt, for whatever reason, they have a right to know before they register. First of all, you cannot tell if they are or not. But most of all, there are simply so many of these tournaments that people just sign up for whatever is available. That doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer a well-run tournament, it just means they don't have the choice. I would like to see enough better tournaments running that there IS a choice, and then I predict you will see them 'voting with their feet'. I think convincing people who are not qualified to TD to learn what they should be doing BEFORE they start running games is a good thing. I also think we desperately need a way that they CAN learn. I very much doubt that the knowledgable TDs who run good games are alienated by attempts to improve the less knowledgable ones. By the way, do you really think it's "*&*(&^%" to want to know the 'rules' of the tournament before you register for it? We need TWO things: 1. We need the TD Wish List software implemented as soon as possible. 2. We need a TD organization for communication and education among the TDs. Fred and Uday have to do #1. I'm hereby taking volunteers for #2.

No, I think the TDs who read this forum are mostly those who DO want to help improve the situation. The feedback I have been getting is very encouraging to this end. Some have offered to help. Some have said they would like to have some better training themselves. I'm still hoping that the rest will come to realize it's a positive move to put a stop to the kind of silliness that I 'rant' about, and jump on the bandwagon to help.

I can't agree more :D next topic please The goal of this game is to play well, to enjoy a partnership game with a chosen partner, against opponents who are playing fair and using the same rules for everyone, the rules of bridge. I think the 'homing device' problem is not mine, but something that draws people to try and be a TD when they don't know the rules, don't care about them, care only about 'keeping things moving', and couldn't give a fig whether the players in their tournaments get a fair and enjoyable game of bridge or not. Ask yourself why you want to be a TD when you really don't care about doing it right. I have been extremely surprised at the number of private emails and messages I have received from people agreeing with my posts in this forum. Here is an example quote: "I highly regard and respect you for your candidness in these forums. In virtually every post you express my sentiments exactly." and "Thanks for your efforts. You speak for many players." Frankly, I'd prefer that those "many players" would speak up for themselves, so I don't look like the lone ranger on these issues. However, one person said, "I decided a long time ago to stop posting because I don't believe that anyone cares if BBO improves or not." So, flame me all you want, but all you do is intimidate people like the above quoted one from posting their honest opinions. As another person said, "BBO has become another yahoo but with a nicer interface", and I am doing the only thing I know to improve that situation -- make my ideas public.

I don't understand why you joined a tournament with the above description, as it does not follow the laws of bridge, either. I agree that it is not really fair to change rules as the tournament starts, but you already had SOME warning that the director was changing laws of bridge. This is true. I tolerate some of the bad directing when a partner wants to play in a particular tournament. This issue is about changing the rules at the last second. Given my own choice, I would avoid all tournaments with these kind of directors, playing TDs, non-Laws, etc, but when I get sucked in by descriptions that are essentially lies, or changed at the last second, it is impossible to avoid them. It's bad enough that these things are allowed, but at least the TDs could be forced to post correctly!

This is getting even further out of hand!!! Today: I joined a tourament that the description said "Psyches not allowed 1st/2nd seat", with 18 minutes to go. When the tournament started, the TD said "Psyches are not allowed". I checked the tournament description and it had been changed. So I told him, that wasn't fair to change the "rules" after so many people had signed up. He replied, "used too much is no psyche anymore and never alerted". I pointed out that psyches are NEVER alertable. He replied, "we prefer honest players" I asked if he thought that psyches were dishonest. He replied, "NO, but read BBO Rules, it is no psyche anymore" and then "read WBF." I guess he never heard of Law 40A. How can I stay out of improperly run tournaments that change the "rules" after it starts? FRED, can't you PLEASE do something about the horrible TD situation? There must be SOME way to put a stop to this idiocy.

You are praising someone for (1) not understanding the Laws, (2) booting someone for an honest answer, and (3) being gutsy enough to do all this without a qualm of conscience? If you take this approach to the natural extreme, it means that anyone can do anything they want, as long as they are 'gutsy' about it. Backing up "her own self-imposed zero tolerance policy" does not make the policy correct, legal, or moral -- it merely makes it imposed.

It is NOT an actual bridge law. It's something that TDs are doing to make decent players angry. The only people who could possibly be happy about these homegrown 'rules' are (1) TDs who are too lazy to deal with the occasional psyche, and (2) extremely weak players who haven't the slightest idea they've been psyched until it's way too late.

It is not worse. If you open 2N (which by any agreement or not, partner will expect strong balanced hand), and you are psyching, you MUST explain your AGREEMENT. It is absolutely right to say "20-21 hcp bal" if that is what partner will expect, even if you are psyching. If you say, "No Agreement" or "Undiscussed" in an attempt to protect yourself from the ire of the opponents when they discover the psyche, you are lying about the meaning of your bid. THAT is worse.

Whether it's Operant or Pavlovian conditioning that the ACBL bought into, the net effect has become to reward mediocre play. This means that excellent play has no reward to distinguish it from mediocre, and ultimately that no one has any incentive to excel. Very sad.

:P 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. ;)

Extremely well said! Certain things are standard and expected to be understood by both partners and should therefore be explained even if not specifically discussed (for example, the opening 2N mentioned in an earlier post). But any convention (such as Lebensohl) always has the possibility of "No Agreement", and your three options and the following paragraph are an excellent guide for any director to commit to memory.

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.