Fairly ridiculous TD ruling on BBO...

[Bbradley62]

So I just entered one of the Free BBO Tournaments we didn't even mange to bid the second hand :blink:

Playing in the free tournaments is very similar to playing in the Main Bridge Club -- if you play several tournaments, you can determine which ones are worth playing and which are not, in much the same way that you add players to your friends or enemies lists in the MBC. Don't condemn all based on this one experience. The bigger tournaments appear to be reasonably competently run.

[Little Kid]

This was only the fourth time playing together so we didn't have any agreements about 4♥ therefore it was not alerted as it had no conventional meaning. I assumed (and would expect anyone else to do so too) that it is preemptive with quite a large range under these conditions.

 

The only reason I mentioned optimistic is because in my view it is on the lighter end of a 4♥ bid. But with a passed partner, 3hcps and a 6-5 I'd have probably ended up bidding 4♥ too. The opponents are certainly cold for game or slam and I wouldn't want to pussyfoot around with 2♦ (which would have been Michaels) in order to let them find their best contract. Irrespective of my personal opinion on whether 4♥ is an overbid or not, I think there is still a world of difference between a potential overbid and a calling it a psyche.

 

I was kind of annoyed about it yesterday but over it by now. I'll take the advice of trying out other tourneys. BBO is still awesome :rolleyes:

[kenberg]

I know of no one who plays that (1D)-4H shows shows six hearts and five spades. But lots of people play that 4H shows a lot of hearts, not much defense, and a desire to force the opponents to an early guess. And so it was here. Maybe some pairs sit down and sharply define exactly what should be expected of 4H, but to my mind I would not be amazed if a pick-up partner, a regular partner or any opponent, known or unknown, produced such a hand. It's not that it shows such a hand, it just doesn't preclude such a hand.

 

 

Long ago a woman told me of the following experience, back when wives got together with other wives whose husbands were co-workers. After a competitive auction she doubled, setting the declarer maybe three or four tricks. The hostess took her aside and explained "We never double here, the declarer feels bad enough just from not making her contract".

 

 

Some tourneys are played in this spirit. Maybe they should have an asterisk or something.

[Oof Arted]

:(

 

Robin I am not saying this case is or is not a psyche

 

My main point is that in a lot of tournies the organisers have decided you cannot use psyches or HUMS

 

That is up to them

 

If you disagree with the ban Then you don't play

 

As you should have read after I said I am not saying the TD was correct

 

Merely pointing to the I may wana psyche lobby that they play elsewhere

 

;)

[RMB1]

I am saying that if I knew of the no psyche policy and entered the event accepting that condition of contest, I would not expect to be ruled against if I opened 4♥ on any hand with six hearts. This is not a no psyche policy but a "you must bid how I bid" tournament (and should be advertised as such, including a description of "how I bid").

[helene_t]

The problem with no-psyche tournaments is not that some of us can't have a decent game of bridge without psyching.

 

The problem is that many so-called psyches are not psyches at all but rather normal calls that TD and opps happen to find strange.

 

So when playing in a no-psyche tourney I feel very constrainted. Whenever I have a difficult to bid hand I know that no matter what I bid there is a risk that TD will consider it a psyche. The safest solution is to over-do disclosure. If I open 1NT with a 5-card major, alert it as "could contain a 5-card major" etc. But that isn't fair to my own partnership, especially if we don't have many agreements.

 

In practice I don't adjust my style much and I must say I have only twice had a bad ruling against me. I then mark those TD's as enemies and avoid their tourneys in the future. Most TDs are ok and even if they are not, the chance of running into a bad ruling is not that big.

 

Best advice is to don't bother about it, and if you happen to get a bad ruling just take it as "it's only a game", and avoid that TD in the future.

[kenberg]

Directors have a tough job. To balnce the complain against bad rulings, I nominate the following for some sort of award as most absurd call for a director.

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=st942h983djtcak43&s=sj6hakq74daq86c76]133|200|Scoring: MP

1♥ P 2♥ P

3♦ X 3♥ P

P P[/hv]

 

Maybe I needed to jump to 4♥ but I didn't. Anyway, the first two tricks were the king then ace of spades on my left (from AK tight) and then a shift to a heart. I drew trump in three rounds, went to the board with a club and led a diamond, losing, as expected, to the king. A diamond came back, taken on the board, and I claimed, accepted.

 

At this point rho asked if it was too late to summon the director. I replied that no it was not if he had any problem, so he did. He explained to the director that at the time of the claim my hand contained the losing 7 of clubs. The director, in some sort of tactful manner, told him to stuff it.

 

I once played with a pick-up in a f2f tourney where a similar thing happened. Declarer exposed her hand and announced she would run her clubs. Partner called the director, pointing out that she did not say whether she would run them from the top down or the bottom up. The ruling was similar.

 

 

I rarely summon a director for online tourneys. Or for f2f tourneys either, for that matter. I probably would do so in, say, an online acbl tourney if disallowed conventions such as the multi were being deployed. Not because I object to the convention, but if we are to allow such things then I may have some of my own that I would like to use. But generally I think we should let people bid their hands as they see fit.

[Rodney26]

The ruling is completely ludicrous.

 

I strongly disagree with the psych banning tolerance that has evolved on BBO. I have read Fred's rationale for it and understand his reasoning. It's a big site and can accomodate all sorts of players from kitchen table to world class. However, it does create this type of slippery slope where now players & directors think it is in their purview to do things like this. The directors really should be following the Laws.

 

Maybe someday the site can have its tournaments discriminated between its more casual directors and ones that intend to follow the rules as they are written. This way players who understandably are going to get frustrated over nonsense such as the above will know ahead of time that this could occur and find a more appropriate spot to play in the BBO universe.

[Keeper1]

You think that was fairly ridiculous: how about this?

 

You hold:

 

J652 T6 T82 QT63

 

The auction (mps, both vul) was:

 

1H (x) 3H p

4H (x) p 4S

x p p

 

 

Before making my 4S call, I queried the 3H bid and, after some delay, received the explanation that it was "10+ points with H support"

4SX was down 2, while 4H(x) would have made.

 

A few minutes later we were notified that the (good) score had been adjusted to average minus. No TD call was made at the table, and the ruling made was with no consultation or questioning of us. When I queried the reason for the adjustment, I was informed that my 4S bid was a (forbidden) "psych" since I had "only 3 hcp." On further questioning I was told I should have alerted any "artificial or unnatural bids." When I responded that my call was unequivocally natural (and indeed "to play"), I was told I should "alert any unusual bids."

 

I posted the hand neutrally at the time on the BBO Forums, with most responders favoring the supposed "psych" 4S call.

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=39675

 

That wasn't the hand that stopped me playing free tournaments however. We carried on immediately to another tourney. On the first board pd opened an aggressive weak 2. A few minutes later we were again informed of an adjustment because although psychs were permitted thay had to be notified to the director. Pd didn't think he had psyched...but the director turned out to be one of our opponents on the hand above! This was one of the larger free tourneys, and the last I played....robots don't accuse you of psyching, however you bid.

[jillybean]

It's no wonder this is happening when the rules of the game have been changed and individuals make their own rules on the fly.

 

Please come and play in my tournaments, I don't ban psyches, make automatic adjustments for failure to alert or boot players for querying the TD :)

[bd71]

A local club has recently instituted a new rule that limits players to one "psyche" per session. Subsequent bids deemed psyches get a bottom board. Club manager openly admits this was put in place because of one specific player who is an aggressive and (in my opinion) often foolhardy bidder.

 

Problem is that this player's wild bids are rarely what I think of as true "psyches." They are often based on distribution with minimal strength and extremely optimistic views in medium-to-high level competitive auctions. But they rarely are what I think of as "pure psyches" that radically misdescribe his distribution.

 

I have been "accused" of psyching at this club before for 3-level pre-empts without holding 2 of the top 3 honors. This wasn't reported to the director/manager, so I have no idea how she would have ruled and whether this would have been counted as my "one for the session."

 

So have to admit that I'm on uncertain ground at this club now for bids that seem normal to me but would likely be considered unusual by others.

[jamegumb]

You think that was fairly ridiculous: how about this?

 

You hold:

 

J652 T6 T82 QT63

 

The auction (mps, both vul) was:

 

1H (x) 3H p

4H (x) p 4S

x p p

 

 

Before making my 4S call, I queried the 3H bid and, after some delay, received the explanation that it was "10+ points with H support"

4SX was down 2, while 4H(x) would have made.

 

A few minutes later we were notified that the (good) score had been adjusted to average minus. No TD call was made at the table, and the ruling made was with no consultation or questioning of us. When I queried the reason for the adjustment, I was informed that my 4S bid was a (forbidden) "psych" since I had "only 3 hcp." On further questioning I was told I should have alerted any "artificial or unnatural bids." When I responded that my call was unequivocally natural (and indeed "to play"), I was told I should "alert any unusual bids."

 

I posted the hand neutrally at the time on the BBO Forums, with most responders favoring the supposed "psych" 4S call.

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=39675

 

That wasn't the hand that stopped me playing free tournaments however. We carried on immediately to another tourney. On the first board pd opened an aggressive weak 2. A few minutes later we were again informed of an adjustment because although psychs were permitted thay had to be notified to the director. Pd didn't think he had psyched...but the director turned out to be one of our opponents on the hand above! This was one of the larger free tourneys, and the last I played....robots don't accuse you of psyching, however you bid.

FWIW, I would have considered you passing that double (with 2♥ and "only 3 HCP") more of a psyche.

[blackshoe]

Frankly, I think Don Oakie's crusade, back in the 1970s, against psychs did a great disservice to the game, one with which we are still trying to deal.

[1eyedjack]

Heh. I have never heard of Don Oakie, and I can only speculate but my guess is that the vast majority of psych-barring TDs have not either.

[gerry]

It's no wonder this is happening when the rules of the game have been changed and individuals make their own rules on the fly.

Exactly.

 

I have read the rationale behind allowing people to organise tournaments of card games other than bridge, but its complete BS and to the detriment of all bridge long term.

 

People who might have just learnt or still be learning will likely play free tournaments before getting completely hooked, and this nonsense will put them off faster than anything...

[peachy]

It's no wonder this is happening when the rules of the game have been changed and individuals make their own rules on the fly.

Exactly.

 

I have read the rationale behind allowing people to organise tournaments of card games other than bridge, but its complete BS and to the detriment of all bridge long term.

 

People who might have just learnt or still be learning will likely play free tournaments before getting completely hooked, and this nonsense will put them off faster than anything...

I'm not worried of what "puts them off". What is more of a problem is that if they venture into the real world, they will be a pain in the bee-hind to get them acclimatized to how the game really is played, what the laws say, and that they should stop their constant complaining or saying *this was the rule in so-and-so tournament*. Well, TD's in real life or quality online tournaments are supposed to have good people skills, but I don't envy the TD who gets these people to their online of F2F games.

[jkdood]

...if they venture into the real world, they will be a pain in the bee-hind to get them acclimatized to how the game really is played...

Hmmn, perhaps a new slant on ZERO TOLERANCE is being born?

[barmar]

The problem with no-psyche tournaments is not that some of us can't have a decent game of bridge without psyching.

Why would you even bother entering a no-psyche tourney in the first place? It's not like there's a shortage of decent tournaments on BBO.

[blackshoe]

If I see "no psychs" in a tourney description, it waves a red flag. One that says "do not play in this tourney".