Should I adjust or give penalty?

[rwylee]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s52haq42da872ckqt&w=st4hkj75djt43cj86&e=sakqj98763hdq5c75&s=sht9863dk96ca9432]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

N opened 1n, E DB, S REDB, then all Pass

 

after E led ♠akqt and took all 9 tricks, N called me and complained about not alerting DB by E, he said E should alert DB if it was a penalty, I asked them if E-W agreed to use any convention at the beginning of that round ( It was an IND tour by the way), and they said no. But N insisted that if it was penalty, they had to alert it and explain. I told them if they didnt agree any convention, like capp at the beginning and didnt have it in their profile, DB 1N normally means strong hand and equals to 1N opening hand. So I didnt adjust because of that. W also said he was not sure about the DB, but he decided to pass because of S's REDB. However, N said E-W would not bid something their p didnt know (E and W are from the same country), so he believed that they knew DB= penalty in this case.

 

Was I right on this? Thank you for your help in advance!

 

Rex

[paulg]

Welcome to the forums.

 

Although BBO does not have a defined set of alerting rules, in the UK, USA and the WBF alerting rules, a penalty double of 1NT is not alertable.

 

I think you did fine :)

 

BTW when I run an occasional tourney I always specify WBF alerting rules for clarity.

 

P

Edited September 25, 2005 by cardsharp

[rwylee]

Thanks for your information :)

[mr1303]

I can't imagine a set of rules whereby a penalty double of 1NT should be alerted. A double meaning "I don't think you can make this" sounds as unconventional as they come.

 

Alternative doubles such as a DONT double showing a long single suit absolutely should be alerted.

 

I would assign a procedural penalty to NS for wasting the director's time.

[candybar]

Penalty doubles of 1N are not alertable, and you should just tell N that. Sounds to me like you did exactly right and were very professional about how you handled the call and the subsequent discussion.

[Guest Jlall]

X is just a natural bid. Another case of trying to get a double shot after some ridiculous result. N should be barred from playing in tourneys, I can't stand this.

[barmar]

I can't imagine a set of rules whereby a penalty double of 1NT should be alerted. A double meaning "I don't think you can make this" sounds as unconventional as they come.

Be careful with this logic. Unconventional does not necessarily mean non-alertable. In many jurisdictions, penalty doubles of opening low-level suit bids would be alertable. Take-out doubles are conventional, but they're practically universal, so most SOs have made them non-alertable.

 

But I don't think any SOs require alerts of penalty doubles of natural NT openings. Systems that use this double artificially (e.g. DONT) are popular, but not so common anywhere that it would make sense to change the alert requirements.

[jillybean]

X is just a natural bid. Another case of trying to get a double shot after some ridiculous result. N should be barred from playing in tourneys, I can't stand this.

Justin you should run a few tourneys :o

[hrothgar]

X is just a natural bid. Another case of trying to get a double shot after some ridiculous result. N should be barred from playing in tourneys, I can't stand this.

Justin you should run a few tourneys :o

I've run a fair number of tournaments on BBO.

My reaction is similar to Justins...

 

My natural reaction is to ask a "simple" question to the aggrieved party...

 

"If a penalty double of 1NT requires an alert, than what, pray tell, does not?"

[shoeless]

And that begs a question - what would he call his tourney? Hitman, Nuking Whiners, Ah Shut Up!, Dirty Harry - (Make my day!), Welcome to the Electric Chair - if it was a pay tourney I would buy a years worth of entries - it would be a blast.

[jillybean]

X is just a natural bid. Another case of trying to get a double shot after some ridiculous result. N should be barred from playing in tourneys, I can't stand this.

Justin you should run a few tourneys :o

I've run a fair number of tournaments on BBO.

My reaction is similar to Justins...

 

My natural reaction is to ask a "simple" question to the aggrieved party...

 

"If a penalty double of 1NT requires an alert, than what, pray tell, does not?"

Let me clarify, I thought this was a fairly reasonable director call compared to some of the calls that are made.

Theses types of calls can be dealt with quickly and easily. I would hate to see penalties or suspensions handed out for what someone sees as a frivolous call. All levels play here and I don’t believe everyone has sinister objectives.

[rwylee]

Ironically, that N defined himself "World Class"...

Serioiusly, I am just an intermediate who loves to play bridge and have fun... How can I challenge a World Class player :o

 

My mentor says I should stop playing too much and read more books to improve my game... it would be a good thing to do during a tour if there are not too many intentional disconnects and complaints

 

btw, how does BBO deal with the intentional disconnects and those who play the clock? report to abuse@? Does it help?

[rigour6]

lol I would love to see what this scored at IMPs.

 

The double did not have a conventional meaning for the partnership.

The usual meaning of a double of 1 NT opening was appropriate.

I don't know where the redouble comes from, but as W indicates, that took him off the hook.

 

So now we have north who has opened NT with a worthless spade doubleton, and a p who is showing some points and he thinks "Aha! I am going to make a top here on my 2 NT hand".

 

When that gamble goes absolutely into the toilet, he looks for someone to blame.

 

Morale of the story for me:

Just because it was a "weird" distribution of cards, and

Just because your gamble didn't work because of that

 

Doesn't mean the TD has work to do.

[rigour6]

Intentional disconnects: blacklist them.

 

Playing the clock: My default is to go unclcoked for my tourneys, and to warn players that if they fall behind I will average a board on them. Then I do just that. So when a bad board comes, all the delaying does is prevent them from playing another board they might do better on. I let them finish the "bad" board, then when the next board comes up a do I quick A== and shazam! They are caught up, no prejudice to the field, and nothing gained from their delay.