Interesting behaviour

[Walddk]

The RR2 match between Norway and Italy at the Europeans Championships was allegedly unpleasant at times. Here is a Google translation of an article on the NBF website:

 

http://tinyurl.com/6fcf93

 

Juicy stuff.

 

However, remember that

 

-1. This is a literal translation with special Norwegian words even Google can't interpret.

-2. This is how it happened as experienced by the Norwegian camp. We have not heard the Italian version.

 

Roland

[Hanoi5]

I'll comment after a good translation, too many unknown words. However it looks like Bocchi was the 'bad one' not all of Italy.

[Walddk]

I'll comment after a good translation, too many unknown words. However it looks like Bocchi was the 'bad one' not all of Italy.

The translation is actually OK, but the author uses Norwegian slang on occasions, and one can't expect Google to understand those words. Others should be translatable but who knows what goes through Google's 'mind'?

 

Also, there are several bridge terms which Google hasn't been programmed to 'understand'.

 

Here is a link to the article in Norwegian:

 

http://nbf.bridge.no/modules.php?name=News...article&sid=122

 

Roland

[jtfanclub]

I had no trouble figuring it all out in context, I'll assume others can as well.

 

Kind of funny how some of the words got translated, though.

[Walddk]

In my view, the crux of the matter is that when you are not used to losing you don't know how to react when you do. Accept it with grace, be sad or frustrated? Remember that the Italians with virtually the same players as now have not lost as many matches for the past 10 years as they have in Pau.

 

It's a completely new situation for them, and perhaps one should understand that this is tough to tackle. I am not trying to defend their behaviour, but a coin always has two sides.

 

Roland

[pclayton]

In my view, the crux of the matter is that when you are not used to losing you don't know how to react when you do. Accept it with grace, be sad or frustrated? Remember that the Italians with virtually the same players as now have not lost as many matches for the past 10 years as they have in Pau.

 

It's a completely new situation for them, and perhaps one should understand that this is tough to tackle. I am not trying to defend their behaviour, but a coin always has two sides.

 

Roland

I suppose.

 

I'm not sure I like a Norwegian airing dirty laundry as they are winning the event, however.

 

(Not you Roland, I know are a Dane :angry:)

[Walddk]

In my view, the crux of the matter is that when you are not used to losing you don't know how to react when you do. Accept it with grace, be sad or frustrated? Remember that the Italians with virtually the same players as now have not lost as many matches for the past 10 years as they have in Pau.

 

It's a completely new situation for them, and perhaps one should understand that this is tough to tackle. I am not trying to defend their behaviour, but a coin always has two sides.

 

Roland

I suppose.

 

I'm not sure I like a Norwegian airing dirty laundry as they are winning the event, however.

 

(Not you Roland, I know are a Dane :angry:)

I know all Norwegian players personally, so I'd like to emphasize that you can't find better sportsmanship, at as well as away from the table. They were very popular BB winners in Shanghai for a reason, and the fact that only two of the six are in the team in Pau hasn't changed anything in this respect.

 

There comes a time when one must realise that all good things must come to an end. I am not saying that the Italians are over the hill, but it's for everyone to see that they can longer just sit down and expect the opponents to surrender without putting up a fight.

 

Roland

[Echognome]

Here's a short summary for those not interested in reading the whole article. It is, of course, just my take on what I've read.

 

1) Bocchi was complaining about Espen's tempo throughout the match. Taking too long on some bids and being too quick on others. However, the writer points out that Bocchi controlled the tray.

 

2) there was a hand on which espen held x x AQTxxxx AJTx at vulnerable. auction went (1C) - 1S - (P ) - 2D; (P ) - 2S - (P ) - ? and he hesitated about 1 min and bid 3D

His partner (boye brogeland) held AKxxxx Axx xx xx and bid 4D and then espen bid 5D which made.

 

3) After the match ended in a 15-15 tie, Bocchi said that there was a hand where Versace made all 13 tricks, but only 12 were claimed. Harald had asked Versace twice what the result was and was told 4S + 2. Versace also noted 12 tricks on his card. So the Norwegians rejected the scoring change (which would result in 16-14 for Italy). Bocchi said that if they wouldn't change the result, then he would argue about the hesitation on bidding 3D. So the Norwegians looked over the board and agreed that 13 tricks was likely and gave them the 16-14 victory. There was apparently also an altercation between Versace and Harald Skjaeran. A few excerpts with my loose translation below. A native Norwegian (or Dane or Swede) can probably produce a better one.

 

"The Norwegian rejection was too much for Versace, who came out of where the rest of the Norwegian team stood and were talking. It was evident that it was far too embarassing for him that he had given away an obvious trick. He could not live with the mistake, and was the leader of the dispute."

 

"Harald Skjaeran raised his voice and said there was no doubt about what Versace had claimed. Versace came running up to Skjaeran in such a frenzy that more thought he would get into an altercation and grabbed him. With a rising shriek, Versace said that he could not believe that a person who does not know him who raise their voice to him. The atmosphere was building pressure and some other italians tried to interfere."

[gnasher]

Interesting, and quite useful for learning Norwegian slang and bridge terminology, but also obviously written from a Norwegian perspective. I'd want to hear an Italian version of the same events before forming an opinion.

 

Regarding the question of Versace's unnecessary concession of a trick, I don't understand why the players thought it sensible to sort out the problem themselves. If Versace conceded a trick that he had already won, he is entitled to have the trick restored to him as long as he does so within the correction period. The EBL employs directors whose job it is to apply the Laws; why on earth were the players arguing amongst themselves about a straightforward matter of law?

 

By the way, what's a førstereisgutt?

[Trinidad]

What a mess!

 

Why don't the players, captains, recorders, etc. just follow rule number 1: When you have a problem, call the TD.

 

If it would be up to me, I would change the score for the match to 15-14 for not following rule number 1.

 

Rik

[Hanoi5]

Bocchi said that if they wouldn't change the result, then he would argue about the hesitation on bidding 3D. So the Norwegians looked over the board and agreed that 13 tricks was likely and gave them the 16-14 victory.

 

That doesn-t favor the Norwegians. Why would they act on such menace?

[helene_t]

The main problem with this translation is bridge jargon. There is almost no slang in the article. (Wonder if "blodsonen" (blood zone) is the normal word for "vulnerable", though).

[Rossoneri]

Agree with the calling the director for the 13th trick.

 

As with regards the 3D, why didn't Bocchi call the director there and then?

[yuval10]

Allegedly he didn't call TD because he's a "friend of Boye Brogeland" and didn't want to humiliate him.

 

Like we use to say here " if you have such friends, you definately don't need any more enemies" :P

[Trinidad]

Imagine that the Danes would have done a little better against Norway in the last round. And the Germans a little better against the Italians. The Danes would have been 5th and the Italians would have battled for 6th place with the Dutch.

 

The way the Norwegians handled this little incident could have cost the Dutch their ticket to the Bermuda bowl. And they wouldn't even have had the right to appeal!

 

Rik

[gwnn]

You shouldn't use wouldn't and couldn't as extensively as you thought you could.

[655321]

Imagine that my aunt had synapses, she'd be my uncle!

[Rossoneri]

Allegedly he didn't call TD because he's a "friend of Boye Brogeland" and didn't want to humiliate him.

 

Like we use to say here " if you have such friends, you definately don't need any more enemies" B)

Quite right.

 

Shocking that even top class players think that calling a TD is humiliating (opponents)!

[skjaeran]

Here's a short summary for those not interested in reading the whole article.  It is, of course, just my take on what I've read. 

 

1) Bocchi was complaining about Espen's tempo throughout the match.  Taking too long on some bids and being too quick on others.  However, the writer points out that Bocchi controlled the tray.

 

2) there was a hand on which espen held x x AQTxxxx AJTx at vulnerable.  auction went (1C) - 1S - (P ) - 2D; (P ) - 2S - (P ) - ? and he hesitated about 1 min and bid 3D

His partner (boye brogeland) held AKxxxx Axx xx xx and bid 4D and then espen bid 5D which made.

 

3) After the match ended in a 15-15 tie, Bocchi said that there was a hand where Versace made all 13 tricks, but only 12 were claimed.  Harald had asked Versace twice what the result was and was told 4S + 2.  Versace also noted 12 tricks on his card.  So the Norwegians rejected the scoring change (which would result in 16-14 for Italy).  Bocchi said that if they wouldn't change the result, then he would argue about the hesitation on bidding 3D.  So the Norwegians looked over the board and agreed that 13 tricks was likely and gave them the 16-14 victory.  There was apparently also an altercation between Versace and Harald Skjaeran.  A few excerpts with my loose translation below.  A native Norwegian (or Dane or Swede) can probably produce a better one.

 

"The Norwegian rejection was too much for Versace, who came out of where the rest of the Norwegian team stood and were talking.  It was evident that it was far too embarassing for him that he had given away an obvious trick.  He could not live with the mistake, and was the leader of the dispute."

 

"Harald Skjaeran raised his voice and said there was no doubt about what Versace had claimed.  Versace came running up to Skjaeran in such a frenzy that more thought he would get into an altercation and grabbed him.  With a rising shriek, Versace said that he could not believe that a person who does not know him who raise their voice to him.  The atmosphere was building pressure and some other italians tried to interfere."

The facts here isn't 100% correct.

 

I was at the table as a recorder, sitting between Versace and Molberg.

Versace received a diamond lead to the queen and king. He cashed two rounds of trumps and claimed. He had 13 obvious tricks, since he could discard his singleton heart on dummys fifth diamond and ruff his clubs in dummy.

 

However, he claimed in a way that indicated that he conceded a heart trick. Since I couldn't hear what he said, I asked if he had claimed twelve tricks ("+2" I asked twice). When he said yes, I entered +2 on the Bridgemate. Versace and Aa both entered 680 on their scorecards. Both Lauria and Madala (kibbing) had to hear what was said, since I spoke clearly and pretty load.

 

Regarding what happened after the match, Versace was the one starting shouting, not me. But he's no match in a shouting competition! B) What he intended to do when he came running up to my face, I've no idea about. Be that as it may be - I don't care much for his behaviour, nor Bocchis at the other table.

 

Away from the heat, they're both nice guys, and I don't think there's any hard feelings involved now.

 

We discussed the case after the incident, and decided that we'd agree to 13 tricks, since it was quite possible that the whole thing was a mix-up (Versace could be of the misconseption that he had lost a trick before the claim), since Versace for sure would have made all the tricks if he played the hand out and since we didn't want to have a trick that we really couldn't have won through regular play (this obviously was after the heat had dropped).

[Echognome]

The facts here isn't 100% correct.

Harald,

 

Appreciate you clarifying what happened. I hope it was clear that I was making a loose translation of someone else's article and not claiming that I actually knew anything else about what happened.

[LH2650]

Regarding the question of Versace's unnecessary concession of a trick, I don't understand why the players thought it sensible to sort out the problem themselves.  If Versace conceded a trick that he had already won, he is entitled to have the trick restored to him as long as he does so within the correction period.

Assuming that one of the Italians had made a call on the next board before an objection was made, and that there was a legal line of play by which the trick could have been lost, I can't find a law which allows the directors to restore the trick, even if the Norwegians are the ones attempting to cancel their concession. It appears to me that the only way to change the score is for them all to get together and simply report a scoring error. This may be why they did not involve the directors.