xcurt Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 Is it just me or has the pace of play gone from slow to glacial? Watching RIGAL v O'ROURKE last night it was after midnight and there were still at least 12 boards left to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 Fantunes got through NINE boards in 1:55 yesterday. The director was threatening to pull four boards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMorris Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 In the US does anyone actually get fined for slow play? I understand that there are theoretical fines but do they ever occur in practice. It may just be an impression but watching on vugraph the US events do seem to be played at a slower pace than many other serious competitions. If the fines are only theoretical then clearly people will take as long as they can - to improve the marketability of bridge stopping boring people rigid would be helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 I believe there was a match that was shortenend by 4 boards. Fines were mentioned in passing by the Vugraph commentators. But, unless there is some kind of discussion about slow play, u cannot always tell whether there is a Vugraph issue or the play is actually slow. Also, they do not always mention when the players leave for a smoke or pee break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 I believe there was a match that was shortenend by 4 boards. Fines were mentioned in passing by the Vugraph commentators. But, unless there is some kind of discussion about slow play, u cannot always tell whether there is a Vugraph issue or the play is actually slow. Also, they do not always mention when the players leave for a smoke or pee break.It is true that the Vugraph operator doesn't always mention whether a player is in the tank or whether some players are out smoking or peeing. But it doesn't really matter, does it? A match is scheduled to take place from time A to time B. This simply means that at time B all the boards have to be played. If the players spent half of the time smoking or peeing, they simply get less time to play. Now, I am certainly not in favor of penalizing slow play as soon as playing time is over. But some segments go one hour into overtime. And then it is getting out of hand. I also understand that it is difficult to penalize players in a KO match. Who do you penalize? If it is clear that one pair is slow, then you penalize that pair. But if both pairs are slow, then penalizing both pairs equally doesn't have any effect. The penalties cancel each other. Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Edit: Suggestion to solve the slow play penalty problem moved to Bridge Base Forums -> International Bridge Laws Forum (IBLF) -> Laws and Rulings Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 It is correct that a director pulled 4 boards from a round of 32 match. From what I know the director made no attempt at determining who was at fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Ah these players playing natural systems; they are so slow. Now a pair who really know their relay system are much faster. Natural bidders slow down the game. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 I saw this in the August 2 bulletin: Tournament Disciplinary Committee decision After the Friday, July 31 round in the Spingold, the NABC tournament DisciplinaryCommittee heard charges against Matt Granovetter-Ron Rubin and Walid Elahmady-Tarek Sadek for violation of the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge and ACBL Regulations due to a very late finish in the second quarter of the their quarterfinal match.The committee found Matt Granovetter-Ron Rubin responsible for the delay and placed them on 30-day probation, effective immediately. No discipline was imposed on Walid Elahmady-Tarek Sadek. I don't know what they mean by "30-day probation". Could it be something like: "If you do this again this month then... we get really angry at you!"? Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 Ah these players playing natural systems; they are so slow. Now a pair who really know their relay system are much faster. Natural bidders slow down the game. :unsure: LOL great post! ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted August 2, 2009 Report Share Posted August 2, 2009 I don't know what they mean by "30-day probation". Could it be something like: "If you do this again this month then... we get really angry at you!"? The probation should be for 30 days of NABC play rather than a plain 30 days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.