What does pard have?

[hrothgar]

I bid 5♣.

 

Immediately the table host (either Advanced or Expert), who was my pickup pard typed "IDIOT" and booted me.

 

I was just wondering if 5♣ was a terrible bid.

I get the impression here at least that I wasn't an idiot and that 5♣ was not unreasonable.  (If you want to know his hand, I didn't have a chance to see it because  I was booted so fast)

No true expert should be that rude... ...or be allowed to be to a less experienced player.

 

Report them to Fred and the "yellow badges".

 

Bridge does not need that sort of behavior as publicity. Or experts that don't understand that.

Damn strait! Ira Rubin, Al Roth, Barry Crane and the like should have banned from playing years ago. Who would ever want players like these competing in the sport of gentleman?

 

Grow up. It's asinine to pretend that talent is synonymous with decorum. There is nothing wrong with saying that you place a value on appropriate behavior (whatever you happen to think that might be). But don’t pretend that this has anything to do with the ability to play cards.

 

I agree that the player's behaviour was reprehensible. (Though I doubt that i would bother to waste the time of a yellow) However, his offense is the way that he acted. Not that he did XYZ while claiming to be an "expert"...

[foo]

The days of the like of Ira Rubin "The Beast" behavior being put up with are in the past.

 

=Especially= when it comes to public deportment by Experts toward novice or relatively inexperienced players.

 

(Experts are still allowed to be more p*ssy at each other than at lesser players, but even there the Zero Tolerance environment has made the standards of ATT conduct more stringent.)

 

Bridge =has= grown up. The realization that this is an =entertainment= activity for most and that if we want their money we have to behave to what our mothers would have regarded as an acceptable public standard is now the accepted norm.

 

Experts, as this community's aristocracy, have an obligation to help Bridge be perceived in a positive light.

[helene_t]

Everybody has an obligation to behave. One may be tolerant towards children, mentally disabled, people in a desperate situation, and foreigners with limited knowledge of local ethics. I cannot see why one should be less tolerant towards rude bridge experts than towards rude non-experts, other things being equal.

 

This is irrelevant to this thread since it concerned some jerk who labeled himself as expert, not a real expert. It comes as no surprise that such a person is rude, since

- He (unconsciously) realizes that most bidding disasters are his own fault (or are perceived as such by opps and kibbers) and therefore his need to blame it on p is greater

- One reason why he never grew up to "intermediate" level (let alone expert) is that he cannot learn from his own mistakes because he don't recognize them.

 

Of course this is just a probability argument. There are plenty of nice people who overrate their own abilities as well.

[foo]

The main point of what happened is that =regardless of the Bridge being "good" or "bad"=, that sort of behavior is simply unacceptable and one should be taken to task for it.

 

The more experienced you are or claim to be and the wider the skill discrepency (claimed or real) between you and your partner, THE GREATER YOUR OBLIGATION IS TO BE POLITE.

 

...and the more stringent the enforcement or harsher the penalties should be for being rude.

 

I have witnessed, and completely agreed with, an expert or two being told to leave the playing area, or even the event, for Conduct Unbecoming a Human ITRW. I have no problem with the same standard being applied to BBO.

 

I repeat: If someone claims to be an expert and then indulges in behavior like calling inexperienced players "idiots" and booting them, they should expect far more scrutiny and far harsher penalties than the average player.

(and anyone who does such things is violating the standards of conduct for BBO and could be put "on vacation" from BBO for it.)

 

It's part of the price of calling oneself an Expert that you are held to higher standards than the average player.

[hrothgar]

The main point of what happened is that =regardless of the Bridge being "good" or "bad"=, that sort of behavior is simply unacceptable and one should be taken to task for it.

 

The more experienced you are or claim to be and the wider the skill discrepency (claimed or real) between you and your partner, THE GREATER YOUR OBLIGATION IS TO BE POLITE.

 

...and the more stringent the enforcement or harsher the penalties should be for being rude.

 

I have witnessed, and completely agreed with, an expert or two being told to leave the playing area, or even the event, for Conduct Unbecoming a Human ITRW.  I have no problem with the same standard being applied to BBO.

 

I repeat:  If someone claims to be an expert and then indulges in behavior like calling inexperienced players "idiots" and booting them, they should expect far more scrutiny and far harsher penalties than the average player.

(and anyone who does such things is violating the standards of conduct for BBO and could be put "on vacation" from BBO for it.)

 

It's part of the price of calling oneself an Expert that you are held to higher standards than the average player.

So, should rating systems like the Lehmans or (gack) master points be adjusted because someone is an asshole? I doubt that anyone would take a proposal like that remotely seriously, however, its completely analogous to what you are proposing.

 

Labels like "expert" and "advanced" are rather blunt instruments designed to describe someone's skill level. I don't think that anyone takes them remotely seriously, but its what we have to work with. I see no value what-so-ever in throwing an even more subjective concept like "behavior" into the mix.

 

For what its worth, I don't see anything wrong if Fred (or whomever) wants to include both behavioral norms and performance norms when awarding "gold stars". Its his metric, he established this as part of said metric from the get go, and he gets to do what he wants.

 

As I've mentioned in the past, when I learn that a skier won an Olympic Gold Medal I have an expectation that he is a phenomenal athlete. However, I sure as hell don't assume that he is some paragon of virtue who should be admired for his moral courage and dignity. Nor do I think that his medal should be removed because he likes to do weed...

[neilkaz]

I bid 5♣.

 

Immediately the table host (either Advanced or Expert), who was my pickup pard typed "IDIOT" and booted me.

 

I was just wondering if 5♣ was a terrible bid.

I get the impression here at least that I wasn't an idiot and that 5♣ was not unreasonable. (If you want to know his hand, I didn't have a chance to see it because I was booted so fast)

I bid 5♣ as well. I expect PD to have a hand that was too good to overcall 2♣ and since he's coming in at the 3 level, it had better not be borderline.

 

If you trust PD to have an absolute moose, then you can splinter 4♥, but I don't trust a pickup to be that strong and would prefer to have a K or A rather than a lone Q or a void. If PD has said moose, he can carry on over 5♣, noting that you could have bid 4♣ (I'd take that as invitational) or passed, or made a slam try via a Q-bid.

 

As for your PD booting you after 5♣ and calling you an idiot I'd do two things.

 

1) Put him on your enemy (black color) list, and 2) report him to Fred or a Yellow.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[foo]

The main point of what

 

...It's part of the price of calling oneself an Expert that you are held to higher standards than the average player.

So, should rating systems like the Lehmans or (gack) master points be adjusted because someone is an asshole? I doubt that anyone would take a proposal like that remotely seriously, however, its completely analogous to what you are proposing.

I'm not sure how you justify the POV that these suggestions are in any way analogous.

 

Being rude in what has been called "the gentlemen's game" (as in mannerly and civilized) is never acceptable.

 

Being rude to those of lesser skill or experience than yourself is even more unacceptable by genteel standards.

 

Regardless of what some, including you evidently, think, being talented in a field does not absolve you of all responsibility for acting according to the standards of a social environment.

"Everyone has their right to be different as long as they do not adversely affect someone else's right to be different."

 

Steve Sion was one of the best Bridge players who ever lived. He also is a sociopath and a cheat. He doesn't get to play Organized Bridge anymore. He will never be admitted to the Bridge Hall of Fame or its equivalent. It doesn't matter how skillful or talented a player he was.

 

Ron Anderson, who certainly was an Expert and did an enormous amount of good for Bridge, was once penalized for opening a zero count 4333 2N in front of a "Flight D" LOL. The DIC's words were something like "You have no need beside possible sadism to do that to an opponent you rate to beat anyway."

 

Ira Rubin was once thrown out of a National playing area for outrageous behavior (besides language and a voice that could be heard tables away, he also evidently tore up some cards at the time. The TD staff decided they had had enough and that "The Beast" needed a "recess".)

 

Whether Experts like it or not, they are de facto ambassadors for Bridge. People are going to judge the entirety of any community by the behavior of its most respected and most visible members. Organized Bridge is no exception.

 

The financial lifeblood of Organized Bridge is !not! the Expert community. It is the much larger community of "just plain folk" who are not, and in some cases unlikely to ever be, Experts. Without them, Organized Bridge dies.

 

If some novice acts like a churl, they look bad. When an Expert acts like a churl, =Bridge= looks bad.

...and that means Experts, like it or not, bear the onus of a stricter standard of behavior than the rest of the Bridge community.

 

This is so important that the rest of the Expert community and the TD's have to "help" Experts who Don't Get It . Even if it means "help" turns out to be throwing a talented player who persists in acting uncivilized out of playing areas, events, or even from being able to play at all.

Experience has shown that, literally, the survival of Organized Bridge depends on it.

 

The issues are orthogonal, and the vector of "proper behavior" trumps "how good you are".

[hrothgar]

Regardless of what some, including you evidently, think, being talented in a field does not absolve you of all responsibility for acting according to the standards of a social environment.

"Everyone has their right to be different as long as they do not adversely affect someone else's right to be different."

Where did I ever say that talent was an excuse for poor behavior?

 

I am making a very simple claim: Behavioral standard should apply equally to everyone.

 

You, in contrast, are arguing that "experts" have some extra special responsibility. (Or, equivalently, that the talentless should be held to a lesser standards)

[foo]

I am making a very simple claim:  Behavioral standard should apply equally to everyone. 

 

You, in contrast, are arguing that "experts" have some extra special responsibility.  (Or, equivalently, that the talentless should be held to a lesser standards)

Behavioral standards are not the same for everyone. They never have been. Human nature suggests they never will be. From the PoV of fairness, I don't think they ever should be.

 

We do not have the same expectations of children as we do of adults. We do not expect novices to keep to the same tempo or be as stringent about UI issues as we do experienced players. Those standards are even more stringent for the Expert. What for a lesser player may simply be confusion or ignorance is often going to be interpreted as coffeehousing or a tempo break or some other infraction if done by an Expert.

 

Yes, there is a minimum standard for polite public behavior expected of players. Yes, in the past Experts have been allowed some latitude (or assumed some) that others in the community have not. Those days are over.

 

The simple reality is that Experts and Pros playing with clients are under =more= scrutiny than other players. There are =more= expectations of them. They are =more= visible.

 

...and therefore, yes, they can do more damage to Bridge by not behaving up to those expectations.

 

Which means Zero Tolerance has to be even more enforced for Experts than for other players.

 

Maybe some people should rethink whether they really want to call themselves a Bridge "Expert". There are responsibilities associated with that title that go beyond simply a high standard of technical skill.

(Perhaps if those behavioral standards were enforced accordingly, less people would be in such a rush to claim a title that they perhaps should not.)

[Finch]

Pard makes a takeout double, then bids a new suit .  What do you expect he has?

 

1♥ - X - 2♥ - P

p - 3♣ - P - ?

 

 

♠ x

♥ x

♦ Q 9 8 x x x

♣ T 9 x x x

 

Pass?

4 Clubs?

5 Clubs?

Other?

No-one has mentioned the pass the previous round.

 

Isn't anyone tempted to bid over 2H e.g. 2NT lebensohl?

You might be worried that partner has a strong hand with spades, but if he has some normal take-out double - say Qxxx xx AKx KQxx we may have a cheap save against their slam.

[Guest Jlall]

Isn't anyone tempted to bid over 2H e.g. 2NT lebensohl?

You might be worried that partner has a strong hand with spades, but if he has some normal take-out double - say Qxxx xx AKx KQxx we may have a cheap save against their slam.

I definitely agree with the pass, just too much likelihood partner has a strong hand with spades/strong balanced and we get too high as a result.