Another Director Ruling

[Cascade]

Good news the director now admits he made the wrong ruling. :)

 

Bad news he thinks the double was also bad bid and should have scored it Average minus - Average minus :blink:

 

He claims 26 years or something like that as a director. That is a large number of strange rulings.

[neilkaz]

Good news the director now admits he made the wrong ruling. :)

 

Bad news he thinks the double was also bad bid and should have scored it Average minus - Average minus :blink:

 

He claims 26 years or something like that as a director. That is a large number of strange rulings.

I shudder to think of playing in any event directed by this director.

 

South took a shot to give the opps the last guess and it worked out. If N/S aren't cheating, then there's certainly no cause for adjustment as everyone has said.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[barmar]

Well, I agree with the director's assessment that West's double was a bad bid. If it's penalty, he doesn't have a defensively-oriented hand, nor does he have a spade stack. And if it's negative, he's not strong enough to want to play on the 5 level opposite a normal opening hand; but if you were playing with a pickup partner, and presumably hadn't discussed systems in much detail, would you presume that negative doubles are played up to the 4 level?

[jtfanclub]

What I don't understand is, why is this a bad bid?

 

Let's say it's a jackpot game game, $20 for first place, handshake for second place.

 

Last round starts up, and you find yourself at table 3 (Swiss movement). The boards are ordinary and average until the last board, where you pick this up.

 

Wouldn't you bid 4♠? I would without hesitation. I can make it across a Yarborough if I get to pick everybody's shape, and with a pickup partnership there's no way for me to determine if game is makeable. If I make the bid everybody else makes, we might end up moving all the way up to 4th or 3rd. On this, if I'm right, I get $20. If I'm wrong, I get nothing, same as if I made any other bid.

 

If it's board 1, it's a bad bid. But doesn't State of the Match (or the player's perceived SOM) count for something?

[jikl]

There is only one word, (or synonym [ok more tha one word then]), for this ruling, crap.

 

Yes the bid was bizarre, yet, it did have some logic behind it. Depriving opps of the red suits has some merit. As others have said, if the director did not report the south player to abuse for cheating, he may as well report himself for cheating as it is quite possible a friend called him and received a positive result. This is how strongly I feel about this ruling.

 

Sean

[blackshoe]

Do not ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[jillybean]

Joining this discussion late, I agree – the ruling is wrong.

The comment the TD made about having directed for 26years does not surprise me and is akin to the self professed ‘expert’ who gives you free advice after playing 1 or 2 hands in an indy. ;)

 

Do some TD’s check boards during a tournament for ‘unusual results’ that may need an adjustment or are the players calling the TD ?

 

Along with poor TD decisions I think there is a new class of (online) bridge players emerging who have learned to expect an adjustment (A+/A-) when ever the TD is called for anything the player thinks is irregular. The TD’s here would be doing the game and everyone justice if they would simply say ‘I don’t know’ and leave it at that, erroneously quoting ‘rules’ that don’t apply or don’t exist is clearly not the answer.

 

On the other hand, as some people have said ‘we don’t want to play serious games in strict accordance with the laws’ so perhaps the tournament screen should be split into 2 - ‘duplicate bridge tournaments’ and ‘other games’

 

jb

[sceptic]

I think that the best solution to these points would be implementing a tiered TD system like the one that I proposed last month. Split the job of running a tournament into two separate pieces:

 

A Tournament Facilitator function: The TF is responsible for dealing with non-technical issues like substitutions, round announcements, and the like. Tournament Facilitators are linked to a specific tournament that they create.

 

A Tournament Director function: The TD is responsible for technical issues like adjustments, restoring equity, and the like. Tournament Directors live in “pools” that contract services with multiple tournaments.

 

This was suggested by me last year and the year before or something very very similar no one took any notice then and I doubt anyone will take any notice now, which is a shame as I think that is what is really needed

[Cascade]

Do not ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

I like it ...

 

... off topic but it immediately made me think of a player at the local club that I have receive three complete zeros against in the last four boards that I have played her ...

 

1.

2♣ Pass 2♦ 2♠

3♥ 3♠ Pass Pass

4♥ Pass Pass Pass

 

2♣ was strong but not game forcing and she bid 4♥ all by herself with a balanced 19 or 20 points - making with the aid of a couple of finesses and a couple of breaks and one great card in the dummy.

 

2.

2♥ Pass Pass Dbl

Pass 2♠ 3♥ Dbl

Pass Pass Pass

 

The penalty double of our favourable 3♥ was made on ♥ Jxxx with four-card spade support on the side. Minus one for nothing.

 

3.

2♠ Pass 3♠ 4♦

Pass 4♥!! Pass Pass

Pass

 

She introduced 4♥ on ♥ xxxx and bought ♥ AKQJ in the dummy.