I am stunned!

[1eyedjack]

We definitely have a problem.

 

We have a game. It is called Bridge, and the laws are set out in tablets of stone.

The laws delegate to "sponsoring organisations" the authority to prescribe secondary regulations. That authority is strictly circumscribed and those regulations must not be inconcistent with the primary laws.

 

Typically those secondary regulations govern permitted conventions and alerting procedures. There are a load of other matters governed by secondary regulations that may be set out by sponsoring organisations, but these are not extended to the general probibition of pshychic bids (or for that matter plays).

 

See http://forums.bridgetalk.com/index.php?showtopic=527

 

There are several examples of the online game breaching the primary laws, to varying degrees depending on the site at which you play. One example is the ability to play out a hand after a claim is rejected. Another is the ability to review the entire auction at any time in the play. There are numerous other examples.

 

Just because these examples exist (in most cases as a practical expedient because the laws do not envisage some of the problems presented by online play) I do not regard it as carte blanche to disregard the laws purely as a point of the personal preference or "whim" of a particular TD, where no objective necessity exists.

 

I suppose that we could agree that the TD can set whatever rules he wants. You can play "nullo" or "passant" if you want, except that the software is not geared up to it. This is fine, as long as you don't call it "Bridge", because it is not.

[Flame]

I think there is a place for no Psyches tournaments, especially in online bridge.

in Online bridge the players are anonimous and this could lead to some actions that the same players would not make in offline bridge, i think a TD should be allowed to make a no psyches rule.

Beside that maybe BBO can arange some sort of Psyches reconding, but i doubt this will worth the affort.

[Free]

I think this has become a useless thread, nobody is talking about the topic anymore, just about director stuff and psychics.

 

Imo, if you want to make up rules in a tourney, do whatever you want, but make an effort to WRITE THE RULES BEFORE THE TOURNEY STARTS, and not when people are playing already! People can't change their minds to not playing in that tourney or they get recognized as disconnecters, they have to play on in a tourney they suddenly don't want to play...

 

First we start complaining about people not reading the tourney rules, now we have to complain about directors not filling in the rules. Where is this ending??? I don't care if directors are using their free time or not (don't get me wrong - I'm really greatful), they also have their obligations. They still aren't God himself!

[mishovnbg]

Hey Sports Fans!!!!

 

Stop - Cease - Desist!

 

There is absolutely no AbaLucy rule that says Psyches must be pre-alerted to TD's. Our TD's are a little too busy for any such action and I have no idea where this rumor started.

 

AbaLucy recognizes that psyches are a part of expert bridge. We also concur with Uday's assessment about throwing such stuff to strangers althought AbaLucy players have come past the stranger stage.

 

Our policy - Psyches are a part of advance bridge. They are not encouraged. If a player experiences a psyche they are to let the Director know in private and the Director will send the information to the Club database.

 

If it is determined that the psyching shows a pattern that could be intepeted as partner having reason to expect that the bid is not legit, or if the psyching is over used to the point of being disruptive the player(s) will be warned and we will take action it. This hasn't happened so far in almost 300 AbaLucy tourneys enjoyed by 10640 players.

 

Hope this clears up all misconceptions.

 

Aba

Thank you very much Helene! I am happy for expert understanding B) !

Need to say, that I have been told by Marc, playing in abalycy tourney to message before each bluff. I of course didn't do it (law of duplicate bridge is first, directors are second), but bluff one time. Opps asked director and I have been warned by him! So, as you can see, it is not rumour, but fact! Probably will be good idea to talk with your own directors, about level of competition in abalucy and what that mean for them.

I agree with doofik that handle psyches is not for novices and probably for her is better to play in BIL, instead of abalucy, where hunt cruel bluffers like me :D .

Hi Uday! BBO is private and I understand rights of owners to do what they like here, include your right to enforce own opinon of bridge expert and experienced director to all members of BBO. You only don't have rights to change law of duplicate bridge by own opinion and still call game "Bridge", online or not, untill WBF/ACBL didn't do it. I am a bad boy again :D . I respect your work with BBO software very much, you are great programmer, thank you again!

Misho

[spwdo]

Hey Sports Fans!!!!

 

Stop - Cease - Desist!

 

There is absolutely no AbaLucy rule that says Psyches must be pre-alerted to TD's.  Our TD's are a little too busy for any such action and I have no idea where this rumor started.

 

AbaLucy recognizes that  psyches are a part of expert bridge.  We also concur with Uday's assessment about throwing such stuff to strangers althought AbaLucy players have come past the stranger stage.

 

Our policy -  Psyches are a part of advance bridge.  They are not encouraged.  If a player experiences a psyche they are to let the Director know in private and the Director will send the information to the Club database.

 

If it is determined that the psyching shows a pattern that could be intepeted as partner having reason to expect that the bid is not legit, or if the psyching is over used to the point of being disruptive the player(s) will be warned and we will take action it.  This hasn't happened so far in almost 300 AbaLucy tourneys enjoyed by 10640 players.

 

Hope this clears up all misconceptions.

 

Aba

Thank you very much Helene! I am happy for expert understanding B) !

Need to say, that I have been told by Marc, playing in abalycy tourney to message before each bluff. I of course didn't do it (law of duplicate bridge is first, directors are second), but bluff one time. Opps asked director and I have been warned by him! So, as you can see, it is not rumour, but fact! Probably will be good idea to talk with your own directors, about level of competition in abalucy and what that mean for them.

I agree with doofik that handle psyches is not for novices and probably for her is better to play in BIL, instead of abalucy, where hunt cruel bluffers like me :D .

Hi Uday! BBO is private and I understand rights of owners to do what they like here, include your right to enforce own opinon of bridge expert and experienced director to all members of BBO. You only don't have rights to change law of duplicate bridge by own opinion and still call game "Bridge", online or not, untill WBF/ACBL didn't do it. I am a bad boy again :D . I respect your work with BBO software very much, you are great programmer, thank you again!

Misho

hi Misho,

 

 

When u read this topic carefully u will see NOBODY is saying that psyches have to be prealerted except for the director that got this topic started.I DID NOT tell u to message before each bluff, i ask u to inform td that u had , it was claerly announced that this was policy , as claerly as helene put this out again.

4.INFORM TD WITH PRIVATE MESSAGE AFTER MAKING PSYCHE BIDS this is my own rule for tourney, some similar rule excists obvuiosly for abalucy.

 

I understand this topic causes a lot of emotions , what doesnt help is when ppl start misquote/misunderstand and so on, your firist answer to me says already Misho that u found/find messaging a td is waste of your time.

So please as fairness to me,private club and yourself, do not give others another impression than the facts really occured that day.I told u to inform me and that MCSD announced it to what u replied, somany messages i didnt read them.

 

READ POLICY helene wrote, u qouted and i qouted again, i remind u of that.Since u tolk me u didnt read announcement/rules i thought a warning woud help so next time announcement woud be read by player in question.

 

Marc

p.s. IM ONLY REPLIYING TO THIS TOPIC YET IM STARTING TO GET BLAIMED/TALKED OFF/QUESTIONED/AND WURSE FROM SOME.THESE BIDS ARE ALLOWED IN EVERY TOURNEY I HOSTED/HOST/WILL HOST , ALL I/WE ASK TO BE INFORMED AS TD WHEN U USE THESE BIDS.READ FOR A CHANGE WHAT I SAY AND NOT WHAT U THINK I SAY,fat change as hardly a soul reads tourneyrules and or announcements i know, sorry using capps, im getting emotinionel i think over the replies pointing to me.

[uday]

I don't think I'm changing the laws of bridge when I encourage experimentation. Any TD who disagrees should not change them. Any player who disagrees should not play in restricted tourneys.

 

But I agree. this thread is getting away from us. We can all agree w/Free that TDs should announce the peculiarities of their specific Ts before the Ts start.

[NotButter]

As long as we're agreed now that Tournament Directors can, at their discretion, ban psychic calls from their tournaments, as long as it's specified in the tourney conditions:

 

I'd like to encourage some consistency within these regulations.

 

We must also encourage these Directors to ban defensive and declarer falsecards.

 

Who amongst us hasnt been suckered in by one of these devillish coups? Just yesterday a defender played high-low with a doubleton, yet their system card said they were playing reverse count! I was both shattered and infuriated by this gross mis-statement of his spade length.

 

No grey areas here - his system card said black and he played white!

 

I've recovered now, but I was mad as hell about this psychic defensive play.

 

Nick

Sydney

[mishovnbg]

I don't think I'm changing the laws of bridge when I encourage experimentation.   Any TD who disagrees should not change them. Any player who disagrees should not play in restricted tourneys.

 

But I agree. this thread is getting away from us.  We can all agree w/Free that TDs should announce the peculiarities of their specific Ts before the Ts start.

Hi Uday!

 

I will try to be seriuous as much as I can (good boy Misho back ;) ).

I am fan of any experiments!!! Online bridge is different from f2f bridge, facts are obvious. Thinking about the future, where online bridge will be common way, we need to find acceptable corrections to law of duplicate bridge, suitable for online. BBO is pioneer in this area, thanks to great Fred's and Uday's ideas about bridge community of freedom, like USA is country-symbol of it already many years. The only problem, is like you never give gun to child, because he didn't know what he doing, because his experiments normally will finish bad for him and/or for surrounding people. What I am trying to say, one first need to learn to walk, before to try to run... need to make foundation before to build second floor... need to know about wheel before to invent automobile... need to have suitable amount of knoledge of matter, before tries to change that matter... need to have feeling about spirit of subject, before to make analysis... need to understand why law is such, before to do experiments with living souls of players.

 

Ufffffff... I am tired to be sooooooo serious :P (bad boy Misho back)

I am very intersted Uday about any experiments, as I already wrote :rolleyes: . I have several great ideas about new rules of game Bridge and like to help you with experiments in this area B) . Can you do several software improvements, to be able I to do this job for you, of course for free :P .

List of materials(software tools), need for future development of game called Bridge, to improve it to stage of "BBO basic Bridge" or even achieve "BBO advanced Bridge" level :lol:

• 1. *NEW* Possibility of bid 0NT for 6 tricks and 10 points under line. Whole branch of new systems expected and very improved 2/1 system will beat them all!
  
• 2. *OLD* Anti bids, with meaning to make less then certain amount of tricks. Anti bids are with higher priority than normal bids, for example 1anti♠ can be bid after 1♠ and by such bid you declare to make less than 6 tricks. I already had played by such rules in the past. Very funny, but really very complex for hand evaluation B)
  
• 3. *OLD* To be available to make bids at 8 level!!! It is just not fair, to can't sacrifice against sure opps grand...
  
• 4. *OLD* Can we revert down in not vul to old simple formula of (2n-1)*100? Believe or not but in old good times I did sacrifice 7♠ in not vul vs vul with AQ stiff in ♠ at MT for top result(2100 vs 2210)! I love this game!
  
• 5. *NEW* New prise for making same contract in opposite line with less trums/hcp for NT, equvalent for game in existing vul for score and to slam for game. If you think such is impossible, need to say I already did it in MP tourney, where I made 2♠ contract at 2-3 in trumps after psyche, where field made 2♠ in opposite line :lol: . TD was called every turn, because players thought that was mistake and every turn TD looked me more and more angry :ph34r: :lol:
  

If above toys are possible in BBO, I will even agree to make some tournaments there, including various numbers of allowed experiments and I swear to make all needed warnings about discovering of new era of Bridge, suitable only for hard BBO pioneers ;)

 

Be happy, have a fun and please don't make Uday angry, else you will not have the cards like me :P :D :lol: :rolleyes: :) .

 

Your friend Misho

[Free]

Hi misho, I must admit you're very creative with new inventions bridgewise! But I have some remarks:

 

1) If you'd introduce a 0NT bid, the purpose of the bid would go lost completely, since the one extra bid will probably be used for strong hands anyway, and will be forcing for at least 1 round. It would however give a boost for system design! No more nebolous 1♦, no more precision 2♣ openings, complete level-2 lorenzo's :rolleyes: , ...

2) Using anti-bids would create a completely reversed kind of playing method to the game: playing and defending as bad as possible. This could be great, however the scoring must be adjusted, since it's not really fair that someone can make 4♠ and the defenders bid 4anti-♠ but get to 4 tricks since the squeeze didn't work for defenders (declarers in 4♠) somehow :rolleyes: ...

3) I think it has to be a reward for players when they bid to 7X. Too bad for defenders, however, you usually can still bid 7NT if you really want to defend - with bad results however. Also, introducing these bids ànd anti-bids would be crazy. I think the anti-bids would be a better sollution than bids on 8-level against grand slams, BUT the anti-bids give too many new possibilities for defenders to bid. Don't tell me you wouldn't use an anti-bid to show a difference between strong hands (still use Dbl for other strong hands), or as a transfer or something similar...

4) I like the current counting, no need to change it back. Funniest story I had with this stuff: NV vs V my p bids 1♠ with a 4 card like Axxx, he gets to play that doubled, and he made only 1 trick. At the other table our pair bid the small slam just made. Result: 1400-1430 => +1 imp :ph34r:

5) This scoring would be just more punishment for newbies! If they defend poorly because they still didn't see it was a psychic bid and you could crossruff or something in a 3-2 trump suit, then it's just awfull defense and lucky declarer play. If you manage to make your contract, then you already have a great score most of the time anyway.

[doofik]

To Misho:

 

Hey Misho :ph34r:

 

If I go to play in BIL then how will I learn to handle psyches? It's worth a few zeroes to learn and then maybe I can get to the beginner level :rolleyes: If all I cared about was winning there's a novice game every Wednesday night at a local bridge club :rolleyes:

 

Reporting psyches is not in the spirit of a ban; it's in a spirit of fair competition as I've said in my previous post. If I psych every other hand with a steady partner, do you really think that my partner won't realize it? Had I ever asked for a score adjustment because of one of them then your suspicion about results would be correct.

 

♥

 

Jola

[mishovnbg]

To Misho:

 

Hey Misho :lol: 

 

If I go to play in BIL then how will I learn to handle psyches?  It's worth a few zeroes to learn and then maybe I can get to the beginner level :rolleyes:  If all I cared about was winning there's a novice game every Wednesday night at a local bridge club :ph34r:

 

Reporting psyches is not in the spirit of a ban; it's in a spirit of fair competition as I've said in my previous post.  If I psych every other hand with a steady partner, do you really think that my partner won't realize it?  Had I ever asked for a score adjustment because of one of them then your suspicion about results would be correct.

 

♥

 

Jola

Hi Jola!♥

 

I like very much your willing to know as much as possible about our beloved game Bridge. If you like you can organize group, where I will sacrifice part of my free time to teach who like to know more about psyches and ways to fight vs them. I can't be regular, but if great interest and enough people want, I will do it. I hope some of my tricks can help you in your local club, of course if you use there law of duplicate bridge.

Psyches are nothing to do with fair on unfair play. I will discover almost any psyche in competition, both partner's one or opps, because of knoledge where psyches are relative safe and reasonable to do, calulation of the hands all time during the bidding and way of bidding in competition I used to play. I can to do that with any expert partner, who like to psyche sometimes and used to play them. We can do sometimes experiment in that area if enough interest exist and I can play with Adam Miler, american expert who also like bluffs, despite I never played with him. Like any other bids with steady partner there is a lot of regular bids that you are expecting he to do or not to do and it is really not interesting are they psyches, semi psyches, tatical bids, tendentious underbidding... this stuff is just part of high level of great game Bridge. Rule to report all such bids available for steady expert partnership to TD is ridiculous and not in practice anywere in the world, probably because lack of creative beginner TDs at such level :rolleyes: .

 

Misho

[doofik]

Dear Misho :rolleyes:

 

Don't know about any other part of the world but as of 200 years ago you get to psych once during a tourney in the US. I think there is some sanction after the second one. Actually I'm a bit hazy on the whole thing since I don't psych. I'm not sure if it's per tournament or per session. In either case, since there are sanctions, it's normal that US players will tend to report psychs.

 

♥

 

Jola

[doofik]

P.S. Misho, I'd love to take you up on your offer ♥. And thank you for offering in the first place.

 

♥

Jola

[mishovnbg]

Dear Misho  :ph34r:

 

Don't know about any other part of the world but as of 200 years ago you get to psych once during a tourney in the US.  I think there is some sanction after the second one.  Actually I'm a bit hazy on the whole thing since I don't psych.  I'm not sure if it's per tournament or per session.  In either case, since there are sanctions, it's normal that US players will tend to report psychs.

 

♥

 

Jola

Hi Jola!♥ :rolleyes:

Now I understand why and remember that read here in forum about such limitations in USA local clubs. Local clubs in any country/state have rights to play what they like, most popular in my club is now game named "TARO".

 

Some facts:

 

Bridge can be traced back to the early 16th century when a game called Whist was played in England. Through the centuries, Whist evolved and grew steadily in popularity. Early in the 1890's, bridge appeared on the American scene at about the same time it was introduced in England. The game underwent many changes until Harold S. Vanderbilt perfected a new form of bridge in 1925. It incorporated many of the most popular principles and also produced a scoring table. He succeeded so well that his game of "Contract Bridge" became the staple diet of card players everywhere.

 

The word "bridge" comes from Russian Whist, called "biritch," meaning announcer or herald. Bridge players announce their contract bids.

 

1742 - The first book devoted to Whist appeared, Edmond Hoyle's Short Treatise, which became a best seller.

 

1857 - The first game of duplicate Whist was played in London; this eliminated much of he luck involved in which card each player was dealt. It was the forerunner of modern duplicate bridge.

 

1903 - British civil servants in remote India developed the practice of bidding for the privilege of calling the trump suit, thus introducing "auction bridge."

 

1925 - Harold S. Vanderbilt, American multi-millionaire and three-time America's Cup winner, changed the course of bridge while on a cruise. He suggested that only tricks bid and made count toward game, with extra tricks counted as bonuses. These revised rules turned auction bridge into contract bridge.

 

1931 - The Culbertson Summary and Culbertson's Blue Book topped all book sales for the year, outselling such popular titles as Believe It or Not and Crossword Puzzles! "The Battle of the Century" was held in New York City. The team captained by Ely Culbertson won by 8980 points.

 

1953 - President Eisenhower played bridge regularly on Saturday night with top experts. He attended national bridge tournaments when possible. He enjoyed bridge as much as golf and he was considered an excellent player.

 

1958 - Charles Goren appeared on the cover of Time magazine and was dubbed "The King of Aces." The inside story explained the basic rules of bridge and proclaimed it the "United States' No. 1 card game."

 

1990's - There are millions of bridge players in the United States; most play at home and there are also more than 1000 American tournaments annually and 4200 American bridge clubs.

 

As you can see Jola, not all 228 years of USA existing as country are together with great game Bridge, it was invented later. About duplicate bridge it is only 75 years old. So if I "get to psych once during a tourney in the US" 200 years ago nobody will understand what I am doing :rolleyes: .

I don't know about any differences between WBF rules of duplicate bridge and ACBL rules. Can anybody help if such differences exists? I am not asking here about system limitations, but about Law, book, group of written rules... I am not talking about what I like or what my american friend like, what my local TD like, what your local TD like... I am talking about the Law, which any contestant of duplicate bridge tournament must follow, as well as any TD, as long as it is game named Duplicate Bridge Tournament by this Law.

 

Misho

[DrTodd13]

Would anybody be interested in a central repository for maintaining the names of directors and their ridiculous tournament regulations? Too many poor players hosting tournaments and not understanding the rules or why those rules exist. I'd really like to know which directors have these rules so I can avoid them.

[Fluffy]

Dear Misho  :ph34r:

 

Don't know about any other part of the world but as of 200 years ago you get to psych once during a tourney in the US.  I think there is some sanction after the second one.  Actually I'm a bit hazy on the whole thing since I don't psych.  I'm not sure if it's per tournament or per session.  In either case, since there are sanctions, it's normal that US players will tend to report psychs.

 

♥

 

Jola

Hi Jola!♥ :rolleyes:

Now I understand why and remember that read here in forum about such limitations in USA local clubs. Local clubs in any country/state have rights to play what they like, most popular in my club is now game named "TARO".

 

Some facts:

 

Bridge can be traced back to the early 16th century when a game called Whist was played in England. Through the centuries, Whist evolved and grew steadily in popularity. Early in the 1890's, bridge appeared on the American scene at about the same time it was introduced in England. The game underwent many changes until Harold S. Vanderbilt perfected a new form of bridge in 1925. It incorporated many of the most popular principles and also produced a scoring table. He succeeded so well that his game of "Contract Bridge" became the staple diet of card players everywhere.

 

The word "bridge" comes from Russian Whist, called "biritch," meaning announcer or herald. Bridge players announce their contract bids.

 

1742 - The first book devoted to Whist appeared, Edmond Hoyle's Short Treatise, which became a best seller.

 

1857 - The first game of duplicate Whist was played in London; this eliminated much of he luck involved in which card each player was dealt. It was the forerunner of modern duplicate bridge.

 

1903 - British civil servants in remote India developed the practice of bidding for the privilege of calling the trump suit, thus introducing "auction bridge."

 

1925 - Harold S. Vanderbilt, American multi-millionaire and three-time America's Cup winner, changed the course of bridge while on a cruise. He suggested that only tricks bid and made count toward game, with extra tricks counted as bonuses. These revised rules turned auction bridge into contract bridge.

 

1931 - The Culbertson Summary and Culbertson's Blue Book topped all book sales for the year, outselling such popular titles as Believe It or Not and Crossword Puzzles! "The Battle of the Century" was held in New York City. The team captained by Ely Culbertson won by 8980 points.

 

1953 - President Eisenhower played bridge regularly on Saturday night with top experts. He attended national bridge tournaments when possible. He enjoyed bridge as much as golf and he was considered an excellent player.

 

1958 - Charles Goren appeared on the cover of Time magazine and was dubbed "The King of Aces." The inside story explained the basic rules of bridge and proclaimed it the "United States' No. 1 card game."

 

1990's - There are millions of bridge players in the United States; most play at home and there are also more than 1000 American tournaments annually and 4200 American bridge clubs.

 

As you can see Jola, not all 228 years of USA existing as country are together with great game Bridge, it was invented later. About duplicate bridge it is only 75 years old. So if I "get to psych once during a tourney in the US" 200 years ago nobody will understand what I am doing :rolleyes: .

I don't know about any differences between WBF rules of duplicate bridge and ACBL rules. Can anybody help if such differences exists? I am not asking here about system limitations, but about Law, book, group of written rules... I am not talking about what I like or what my american friend like, what my local TD like, what your local TD like... I am talking about the Law, which any contestant of duplicate bridge tournament must follow, as well as any TD, as long as it is game named Duplicate Bridge Tournament by this Law.

 

Misho

Hey Misho, not that I am really sure, but I have been told (and read a book about it) that whist came to england from the arabs, who conquerer Iberian Peninsula some centuries ago. And it traveled north (as many other things did)

 

It remains to us a game called 'brisca' wich is trick based and is suposed to date from very very long ago (played with spanish deck).

[mishovnbg]

Hi Gonzalo!

Just type in Google "game bridge history" and you receive this and more facts about history of our great game Bridge!

Misho

[doofik]

Dr. Todd:

 

I've got a suggestion for you. Instead of creating a master list of directors and their level of competence why don't you become a director? That way you could gather together all those who are poor players and poor directors and you could actually teach them.

 

I resent criticism of volunteers who definitely try their best and without whom you'd not be able to play tourneys in the first place. Perhaps a reality check is in order.

 

Jola

[inquiry]

Dr. Todd:

 

I've got a suggestion for you. Instead of creating a master list of directors and their level of competence why don't you become a director? That way you could gather together all those who are poor players and poor directors and you could actually teach them.

 

I resent criticism of volunteers who definitely try their best and without whom you'd not be able to play tourneys in the first place. Perhaps a reality check is in order.

 

Jola

Hi Jola,

 

Actually, Todd is a director. He has run "Fish out of water" tournments where you had to play a system not "normal" in your home country, as well as others. He has also been an active poster in areas related to proper decorum in tournments, and he is one of the VERY FEW players who post a convention card in every tournment he plays....

 

Like many in this thread, he has very firm views on how tournments "should be" run. The way he stated his views (ridiculous tournament regulations) could be improved perhaps, but his point is easy enough to understand. While, for instance, he would look at a list of tournment directors who bar psyches so he could avoid them, others might look for the same list to find TD's who ban psyches so that they could play in them. I think the problem with such a list, is that TD's might have some events in which psyches or specific systems are banned, and others were they are not. For instance, I would love to see tourments where only BBO Advanced is allowed (maybe in the context of individual event), but clearly not every tournment I directed would be run that way.

 

Anyway, while this thread contains a lot of disagreements, an open sharing of ideas is always useful. One thing for sure, as of today at least, TD's can still allow or ban a lot of things that people particiapating in sponsored events by WBF, or ACBL can not. That is, ACBL rules don't apply to what a TD can do in their own events. And maybe that is the way it should always be here. But I agree with what seems the consensus... the TD should at the very list put this in his condition of contest...because if you join a Tournment, find it not to your liking due to a TD announcement, leaving it could have harmful consequences related to a week ban from all tournment play (at least will add to yor total getting you closer to being banned).

 

Ben

[doofik]

To Ben and DrTodd:

 

If the tone of my previous was offensive I apologize. I was not even aware that DrTodd is a director:-) hehehehe I guess I sleep on BBO most of the time.

 

I think we're heading in the direction of candidates for world leaders - many qualified, none want the job. People who run events put up with a lot and then to have criticism here, it can turn people off. I don't even pretend to want the job.

 

Perhaps there could be a check list created for TD's so that they can check all that apply? Sometimes people might forget to mention some condition of contest that is important to a player. Be it the level of participants or ban on psyches.

 

Jola

[DrTodd13]

I don't have a problem with "the person" who runs a tourney in which a particular system is disallowed. If this person hosted a tourney the next day where everything was allowed then I wouldn't have an objection to joining this tourney.

 

However, I think barring psyches is manifestly different than defining what systems are allowed or disallowed. Sponsoring organizations are given the power to regulate systems but I see nothing about them given the ability to ban psyches. Aside from banning something that the laws of bridge give them no authority to ban, I have a problem with changing the tourney rules in any way once the tourney has begun. The conditions of contest is a contract between the tournament organizer and its participants. One party can't unilaterally change a contract once it has been entered into.

[hrothgar]

From my perspective, Todd has made a very reasonable suggestion. I would very much appreciate the ability to share information regarding the qualification level of various tournament directors.

 

I will note in passing that this type of feedback mechanism is often a critical enabling factor for successful e-business ventures. For example, there have been several case studies that have analyzed the relative sucess of EBay in validating the online auction market. EBay's decision to implement a rating system by which buyers and sellers could provide direct feedback regarding satisfaction is generally considered tobe one of the most critical sucess factor. These types of rating schemes are now commonly used in a wide variety of e-commerce sites.

 

If BBO is going to have "commercial" directors who are providing services in exchange for fees, then the site will eventually need to adopt something similar to the EBay rating system...

[inquiry]

If (when), BBO goes to commericial directors and pay-for-play event, I strongly suspect that there will be qualified directors following somebodies or others rules (ACBL? WBF?). So I think that issue, is moot.

 

The "problem" with the way Todd A presenented his arguement, was to have a site names of directors and their ridiculous tournament regulations. Stated this way, with no positive spin at all, such a site would have a chilling effect on BBO tournments. Who would want to voluteer their time if every decision they make is questioned and their "credentials" ridiculed on line in some web page or the other.

 

Different organizations have wacky rules, some of which don't even agree with themselves. Let's take our "beloved" ACBL for instance. They say you can not open 1 bid in a suit without 8 hcp. I personally think that is a load of bull, if I have a six or seven hcp hand that I think is worth a legitamate opening bid, why can't I? And what about the ACBL rule that doesn't allow "destructive methods" trying to interfer with your opponents methods. That seems to me to outlaw preempts, or at least recklessly wild ones.

 

I am more concerned about ACBL rules/regulations or WBF rules and brown card thingee's than I am rather or not some person on BBO when directing their own Tournment, under the influence of whatever drives them to do this thankless job, decides he will or will not allow to be played in his (and his alone) event. I do agree, however, that if a TD is going to have any restrictions whatsoever, he should create a lin file and post those BEFORE the event begins... even if it is something like ACBL-Mid chart, or WBF rules apply, or yes, no psyching allowed.

 

BTW, I too will avoid psyche free events, unless they are for beginners and mentors only.

 

Ben

[hrothgar]

>If (when), BBO goes to commericial directors and pay-for-play event, I strongly >suspect that there will be qualified directors following somebodies or others ?>rules (ACBL? WBF?). So I think that issue, is moot.

 

A rating system for directors is designed to address the question of variance in quality. Believe me when I say that their is enormous variance regarding the calibre of individual directors even within an organization like the ACBL.

 

ACBL affliation relates to the specific set of rules and regulations that will be followed, along with allocation of matchpoints or other similar "spiffs".

 

I do not accept the argument that ACBL sponsored tournaments would decrease the need for an outside rating system

 

>I am more concerned about ACBL rules/regulations or WBF rules and brown card >thingee's

 

I'm not particularly fond of the ACBL (Ayatolah's Correct Bidding Lessons). I do not participate in ACBL events. With this said and done, the ACBL provides a comfortable environment that many people find enjoyable. I am in no way harmed if other players decide to play in ACBL sanctioned tournaments. More than enough Europeans, Asians and Aussies for me to hang with...

[hrothgar]

>The "problem" with the way Todd A presenented his arguement, was to have a

>site names [sic] of directors and their ridiculous tournament regulations.

 

Seems only appropriate, given that the director's are maintaining lists of troublesome players...

 

>Stated this way, with no positive spin at all, such a site would have a chilling

>effect on BBO tournments. Who would want to voluteer their time if every

>decision they make is questioned and their "credentials" ridiculed on line in some

>web page or the other.

 

The following comment may seem rather harsh, however, I think that it is worth making.

 

Many individuals seem to believe that they deserve some sort of karmic credit for volunteering their time to run tournaments regardless of whether or not the are qualified to do so. In many cases, these "good samaritins" are actual a dis-service to the community. I've seen some simply hellacious director's rulings, many of which left a sour taste in the mouth of one or more participants.

 

Be that as it may, my own pet peeve is director's who can't seem to keep a schedule and either

 

1. Delay the start of a tournament by up to 30 minutes trying to drag in stragglers

2. Continually extend rounds

 

Rulings are few and far between, however, the scheduling idiocy is all too common.

 

I see nothing wrong with players rating directors. I readily expect that there will be some harsh comments made. Then again, a director who can't handle controversy isn't going to cut it...