Old York

I did say that I was talking about sabotage bids. Sabotage bids are a deliberate attempt to ruin everyone else's scores....so why allow the score to stand?

And so it should be, but there is one important exception. If a player makes a sabotage bid, and then exits, the bad board will be inherited by the sub and will show on the sub's and dummy's myhands. There should be some way that TD can cancel the board completely If I am called to the table, I adjust the score before subbing, but dummy is still punished....... is it possible to adjust the hand to pass-out? Tony

I came across one player who filled in his profile with the words "Downloading Profile, please wait......." My kinda humour Tony :)

Hi "Ignorance of the law is no defense" That seems very unfair when the rule books run to 100's of pages and are written in such a way that most people cannot grasp all of the ramifications. I am perfectly capable of running "serious" tounaments and quite agree that the rules should be enforced correctly in such an environment. In a "social" tournament I take a more relaxed approach. As I said, there are 2 distinct types, and they will NEVER agree. There are many situations when logic and natural-justice must prevail, regardless of the letter-of-the-law, the "spirit" of the law must come first. On-line self-alerting is one of bbo's biggest problems. I hope that one day all players will be forced to use some form of convention card Tony (Duke of York)

Hi On bbo there seems to be 2 distinct type of player, and they will never agree on anything. To make life more complex, different countries have different rules. Serious matchplayers like to have all the rules enforced to the letter of the law, this can mean that they get away with failing to alert because the rules do not force them to alert, unless it can be proved that they have a clear partnership agreement. In social tournaments, the opposite should be true, all players must alert, because they are assumed to be playing Sayc, unless stated otherwise. If requested to explain their bids, again, different tourneys have different opinions. I believe that all players have the right to understand their oppo's bids......seems logical and fair to me, but most bbo players disagree. In a tourney of 200 players it is my duty to protect the 199 innocent players. Tony (Duke of York)

hi It is becoming increasingly obvious that this thread has been deliberately hijacked. None of these comments have anything to do with the original post Perhaps it is time for admin to close this thread. As this thread was opened with a libelous mis-quote, perhaps it should be stopped immediately.

Hi Hot Shot Finally, I have found one player on BBO who uses logic, instead of hiding behind a mountain of rule books. Please td in my tournaments. rofl Tony (Duke of York)

Hi Nick I think that you have inadvertantly proved my point, thx If you have a special agreement as to what your re-double shows then it should be alerted and explained to your oppo. otherwise you have formed an undisclosed partnership agreement. The very fact that you do not expect the re-double to be the final contract, again proves that such a call is semi-artificial, part of your bidding system and is perfectly normal and legal. My ONLY objection is to sabotage bids...I have made that very clear in all of my tournaments......mountains, or molehills? Tony (Duke of York)

I Strongly resent the impliction that this adjustment occurred in any of my tournaments. I suggest that you should have made some attempt to contact the tournament director who made this adjustment. Failing that, you should have contacted AnnC8, who was the Host of the Lion and Lamb Goulash # 711 in which you subbed. I cannot comment about the rules enforced in these respected tournaments. As is always the case, you should read the tournament rules before agreeing to play, the fact that you subbed seems irrelevant. Had this occurred in the Grand Old Duke of York Tournaments, I would have demanded that you explain your 3C bid, before making any decision. I would prefer a 4C splinter bid (alerted). I would also have questioned South about his double, if it were Lightner then it also should have been alerted. I would also ask North why he failed to cash his Ace. Sounds to me like a comedy of errors all round. I would not have adjusted, but would warn all players to alert and explain their bids in future. Tony (Duke of York)

Hi Thanks for all the input, but I will always continue to adjust scores and report deliberate sabotage bids to abuse@bbo. There are very few examples of good re-doubles. I had one tonight by Cuteboy. I had 4 examples of sabotage in the same tournament. I applaud Cuteboys bid. I deplore sabotage bids as they adversly affect everyone's scores. In a matchpoint tournament, re-doubles are 99% redundant. If you make a doubled contract then you are likely to score a top anyway. I love to see greedy re-doubles backfire, after 2 passes one player re-doubled, only to find oppo saving in 5 diamonds, doubled and making Tony (Duke of York)

Please click on this link http://www.geocities.com/bbodirectors/dir_biddingsilly.html Also, Please read the Tournament Rules BEFORE you join any Tournament In my Tournaments, the rules have always stated...... "Frivolous Re-Doubles are not allowed, and will be reported" The words "Mountains" and "Molehills" seem to spring to mind :( Tony (Duke of York)

I found that I was allowed to log-in as Old York using the new software, and simultaneously log-in as DukeOfYork using the old software. This allowed me to sit North and South at the same table and see 26 cards. It is also easy to kib the table and see 52 cards. Is there any way to stop unscrupulous players from doing this? Tony

Hi again The story continues............. Last night, 20th May, I played in a well respected tourney, with very well respected host and TD. My oppo (dealer) opened 1NT (not alerted) and my partner bid 2D (natural?). West passed and I had a decent 10 count with 5/4 majors and singleton club. East's profile showed Sayc, so I naturally assumed this to be 15-17hcp opening. I bid 2S, passed by opener, and partner did not bid for a long time. I clicked on 1NT opening....no answer.....clicked again.....and again..... Partner passed. AFTER partner had passed, East alerted "nt11-15" as soon as the opening lead was made I could see that we had 3NT++ laydown I called director and tried to explain, we were asked to play 2S At the end of the hand, I called director again He adjusted the hand to Ave== Please read the Director's Instructions given by bbo http://www.geocities.com/bbodirectors/dir_alertfailure.html We should receive Ave=- 60% to us 40% to them There is no such adjustment as Ave== for failure to alert Tony (Duke of York) Added 22nd May The traveller from the hand clearly shows that :- Out of 38 tables, 26 pairs bid game scoring 1.00/1.78/1.83/2.58/2.67 Only one pair failed in 3NT, only 2 pairs failed in 4S. 5 pairs chose to defend oppo 2H contract scoring 9.56/3.64/-1.36 Only 6 pairs played in partscore contracts Obviously, game was the "par" contract by a large proportion

It should be standard policy in all tournaments for all players to announce their system and no-trump ranges. Most players have notes on their profiles, in various languages, but many fail to give basic information, prefering to prattle on about bizarre conventions that rarely occur. The vast majority of players repeatedly fail to alert artificial bids. Many regular partnerships have undisclosed partnership agreements. Rumours abound about skype cheating. In any f2f tournament, any player can demand to see your convention card. Not so on bbo. A player seems to have no automatic right to understand oppo bidding. In my own tournaments, I demand very high standards of ethics, and am content to adjust boards wherever I can see that a player has been damaged, and give a full explanation to all concerned. I truly wish that this was normal bbo policy. If Tournament Directors were given more help by the software, these situations could be quickly resolved. When I examine a hand, it is often impossible to judge the "par" contract and score until the tournament has finished. Adjustments after a tournament has finished do not seem to work. Tony Hobson (Duke of York)

Hi all As an Acol player, I tried out the BBO Acol cc, but found a number of errors. Notably in the fourth suit forcing sequences, it looks as though the cut and paste editing has caused these errors. I have written my own Benjiminised Acol cc (Benji) a system which is very popular in the UK. Using Benji, Acol players can use weak twos in the majors and can also use strong twos in any suit by opening 2 Clubs (artificial). The 2 Diamond opening bid is used as the artificial game force instead of the traditional 2 Club bid. My cc can be downloaded from http://OldYorkie.spaces.live.com Regards Tony

Hi all You will probably hate me for saying this, but personally, I prefer to avoid regular partnerships. There are many reasons why I say this. First and foremost I think it is much more fun playing with as many people as possible. I have a sackful of Friends and only 2 Enemies (not bad going, huh?) The main reason that I avoid serious, regular partnerships for competition is more a question of ethics. It is very easy to accidentally develop undisclosed partnership agreements. That may sound odd, but if you have ANY knowlege of your partner's "style" then you are on very dangerous ground. A simple example: If you know that your partner is an overbidder or underbidder, it may seem quite normal to adapt your bids to compensate. This, however, is bordering on the unethical. In fact, if you believe that your partner is overbidding, you should never use this information, and should probably overbid too. If your partner then sees that you are overbidding, they may be likely to be more cautious in future (reverse psychology?) Regards Tony

Hi Not certain how you mean that. If you want a printout of SAYC ACBL card, then go to:- http://www.acbl.org/play/toolsSupplies.html and click on "download a PDF of the card" save and print as normal....other cards are available online If you want to print out the FD, it will not help you much, but it is stored on your hard-drive in Bridge Base Online/Convcards/Default Convcards If you right-click on the file and >open with>notepad, you can then print the file complete.....but the format is difficult to read/edit Tony

Hi all All hand records are saved on your hard-drive as .lin files. These can easily be opened and edited in windows notepad. A full .lin file should contain scores for all hands. To see the full traveller, simply visit bbo website. All .lin files can be edited, but the format takes a bit of getting used to. You can also add comments after any card played. Try reading any old files to get a feel for the format used. Tony

Last night (20/12/07) whilst playing in an Acol Club League Match, I was the victim of a mysterious software bug. After agreeing trumps, my partner bid 4NT (RKCB). After my 5C response she signed off in 5H, and quickly wrapped up 12 tricks. She then queried my 5C bid, and I replied that the bid showed 1 key card, and that my profile showed RKCB 1430. She pointed out that my profile actually showed 0314. I asked oppo and RHO said it showed 0314, but LHO said it showed 1430. This is insanity. My profile clearly showed 1430, but several random players insisted that they could see 0314. I tried to get players to send a screen shot of the faulty profile, but failed. I tried to enlist the help of yellows, but macaw and BBO Help could not see the fault. Is it possible that 25% of players are viewing an old version of my profile? I entered a tourney on 19th Dec, and changed profile to Sayc and 0314, but then changed it back to Benji Acol and 1430. Tony (Old York)

To every convention, there is an equal and opposite convention. Hehe If a player fails to alert Jacoby 2NT, Jacoby Transfers etc, then clicking on the bid should produce a logical answer. To claim "no agreement" under these circumstances must be wrong. Even simple auctions like 1NT-2NT may, or may not, be artificial. If there is any delay in answering a query, then the clicker's partner may receive unauthorised info. It is a minefield. lol Any ethical player should have no reason to conceal the bid's meaning. QED Posting a convention card helps a lot, but competitive auctions get lost in the ether. I quite agree that the bidder should never describe his actual hand, and I frequently alert simply as "artificial-forcing" etc but happily answer any resulting query.

Hmmmmm Thx for responses, but maybe I should clarify. I tried to enter an "Irish" Tourney, the instruction was to change my flag to enter. As a test, I changed my flag to Northern Ireland and was rejected. I wonder what that says to the world? On the question of self-alerts, they simply do not work. Even TD's cannot force a player to give "full disclosure". May I quote.... "Players are expected to alert all alertable agreements, and all alertable bids that might be understood by a partner, regardless of whether the bid or convention is specifically discussed. Only if there is absolutely no reason to think that partner will have any idea what the bid means, can a player say "no agreement"." Self explanatory, I would have thought? I do wish people would put ethics first, and winning second.

1. The layout of dummy's suits is often confusing and, to make things worse, the layout of the dummy hand is often different to the layout of declarer's hand. Personally, I do not like the black/red/black/red layout, and would like to see an option for SHDC or SHCD and also Trumps-on-left on/off button. I fail to see why dummy should display SDCH etc in a no-trump contract! 2. Would it be possible for BBO to use Avatars in user profiles, perhaps in place of national flags? There should be no national boundaries in bridge! Is it just me who thinks that encouraging national clubs and national tourneys is a bit "racist"? 3. The Alert mechanism should not include "no agreement". No sane player would ever make a bid that he/she honestly believes partner will mis-understand. The alert must include the systemic meaning of the bid....or at least the bidder's expectation of partner's understanding. With self-alerting it is far too easy to give unethical replies. Tony Hobson