Appeals Committee?

[audither]

Its nice to see that someone reads these forums, and I think some of your comments need answers, but I think some questions need to be ask also.

 

First a comment, this discussion forum concerns what happens on BBO not WBF or ACBL or at your local 10 cent rubber game.

 

The question, do you direct on BBO, and if so are all your players world class ?

because if your running open tourneys, where any level may play, and the type problems adressed here are not a problem in your tourneys, we all want to play in them.

 

Requesting alerts of Natural openings such as 1M / 1D in Polish C, or 4 card Ms in natural systems is just plain silly. The same can be said for having to alert 1C (1H) 1S if this can show a 4 card suit. Good heavens man, these are natural bids. It would be FAR more logical to ask players who open 1m on 3 cards to have to alert this as these bids are NOT natural, (not that I am suggesting you do this.)

 

If players are familier with all the various systems being played, there would be no need to ever alert anything. we would all just pre-alert and it would be done with. Unfortunatly, when you have Experienced players, playing against novice, players there is always going to be a disparity in the level of play. The systems being used by some of these players are totaly foriegn to some players, and as they evaluate their own cards, they have a right to know if a bid promises or denys certain hand patterns, or specific point ranges. Bridge is a game of skill, it was never intended to be a game where special meanings were given to some calls and the opponents not have the right to know what those calls represent.

 

I don't know to what events you are referring here - if you are referring to YOUR rules for YOUR tournaments, however if you are referring to what happens in ftf bridge, this is totally incorrect. A strong C/D bid has to be alerted, but to have to alert a natural opening because it say is from 11-18 or so, is not a requirement in ANY event in which I have played. It is not part of ACBL, EBU or the regulatory organisation of any country of which I am aware. After all, how do you determine what is a GF bid anyway. If you read these forums, you will be aware that there is one guy who opens 2C on virtually anything more than a standard opening- now maybe that is a bid which needs to be alerted

 

this discussion forum concerns what happens on BBO not WBF or ACBL or at your local 10 cent rubber game.

 

 

To make this distinction is illogical. Why can I not open 1N on K AQxx AQxx Jxxx if I think that this will solve rebid problems? Why allow me to open 2N on the same distribution with a 20 count?

 

NO ONE SAID YOU CAN'T OPEN 1NT WITH A STIFF

the wording is should not. If you NORMALLY open 1NT with a Stiff - ALERT !

 

Do you seriously want me alert that 1C 1N can include 4S if I hold

xxxx KJx Kxx Qxx. This is just a straight judgement call.

 

The hand you describe is very common, but if your partner is aware you will bid 1NT holding 4S it should be alerted. If your partner assumes you have no major suit and continues the auction (or passes) based on your "denial" of a major there is no harm.

 

The question of psyches -1 pyche per 10 boards - has been discussed ad nauseum, so I will not belabour the point, but you do realise, I suppose that this is against the Laws of the game? Also you run the serious risk of passing UI on to ,y partner. If I psyche on a board, he will know 100% that my bids are trustworthy until 10 boards have elapsed.

 

Psyches are a part of bridge, they are legal (as long as you do not psyche a conventional bid and your Pd is not aware of a "tendacy"). The problem with psyches, if allowed to be rampid, players get very upset, and many times will refuse to continue play (on that board or any boards left against the psycher). This becomes a HUGE headache for the TD, with options of either subbing the player out (who refuses to play), or assigning adjustments to the board(s)(at which point the players will quit). When you are directing a 3 1/2 hor tourney with 40-50 tables in play, you dont have time to babysit 1 table.

 

I recognize that ACBL alert regulations have little to do most torunaments on BBO, however, given that you were citing your ACBL certification as a qualification is seemed reasonable to comment on your understanding of ACBL alert regs

 

 

I retired from active ACBL directing several years ago, ACBL changes its alert procedure evey time the wind changes direction. Many players I know have quit playing ACBL because of their lack of consistancy. (or maybe consistantly inconsistant is a better term)

[ellie26]

I believe in an orderly lifestyle, and therefore believe in following the rules. Even the DOG is expected to follow the rules in my household.

 

We are members of ACBL because we believe and have faith in the way the organization is managed. We have rules to follow and guidelines that are accessible. Therefore, I think all ACBL games should have an appeals committee. The reason that we pay to play in ACBL is because we expect the game to be run as described by the ACBL Laws of bridge. If not, there should be a device in place for appeals. This has nothing to do to embarass a TD or make anyone look bad. It is a learning process.

 

Why are so many so afraid of being criticized for making a mistake? Only those who do nothing make no mistakes.

 

Oh, I do tend to forget that many are on the chase for ACBL masterpoints, and they really don't care how they accumulate them. Perhaps a category to segregate these people is in order, lol... only kidding !!

 

ellie

[rigour6]

I find this thread most interesting and enjoy the comments and suggestions. Here's my 2 cents:

 

1) As the WORST TD on BBO, maybe it's only worth 1.5 cents.

 

2) People who play in my tourneys had better have come to play, not compete. The tourney is just a way to organize some people all playing together so that they can get a score which presumably adds to their enjoyment. If you actually care how well you do, you are in the wrong place.

 

3) I think an AC would be OK, except for the time factor. By the time you get the results of the appeal, no-one will even remember, and fewer will care.

 

4) If you scare TDs, you will end up with fewer tourneys, which isn't good.

 

5) If there are abusive or really horrible TDs, obviously you have to deal with them. Said the guy first up against the wall come the revolution.

 

6) If there's some consistent ruling which TDs are a) getting wrong or b ) having trouble with, I for one would love to have a) a webpage or b ) a message which described it. Let idiot TDs like me learn in a no-fail environment and you may find an improvement in the rulings at little cost.

 

7) Last but not least, I once had a dog who was really dumb, and I once had a girlfriend who wasn't too bright either but had really nice sweaters. And I loved both of them. Just because a TD doesn't get rulings right doesn't mean their tourneys can't be efficiently run, smooth, and fun to play in. To quote Harvey: "My mother once told me that if you want to get along in this world, you have to be very clever or very polite. For years I was clever. I recommend polite. " I'd rather play in a nice TD's tourney than a smart one's.

[Gerben42]

Wow! There's a lot to respond to. I am also a club TD and recently I hosted my 1st BBO tourney.

 

First Fred's comments:

 

1) ACs do not produce better rulings than TDs in "real life" tournaments (my opinion)

 

2) ACs cause bad feelings and controversy in real life tournaments (fact)

 

3) Most of our players would prefer to live with the occasional bad ruling (these things tend to even out in the long run) than have to wait (possibly hours) before seeing where they finished in a tourney (my opinion)

 

@1: that may be true but I wouldn't want to give the TD the final word either.

 

@2: so do rulings by bad directors.

 

@3: Sometimes injustice has been done and although it might even out in the long run, for people who do not get into the prize money that often there is no long run. I wouldn't want a final word of a bad TD take away someone's very first tournament win for example.

 

My opinion is that you NEED a way to appeal in all tournaments where you can win significant prizes. An exception can be made for tournaments with a staff of several top class TDs who have taken the decision by working together.

 

BBO does not (yet) host tournaments where you can win great prizes so I do not think we need an appeal committee. You pay nothing or just $1 to play a tourney, you can hardly win anything, no AC.

 

But a regional tourney with 1 TD and a first prize of say $100 per person and $15 per person entry needs an AC for example.

 

***************************

Alerting in BBO:

 

It is my opinion that in BBO one should follow the INTERNATIONAL alerting rules (as they are with screens). This does not include alerting limited Precision / Polish Club natural opening 1-bids. I would expect people to have a CC posted. If this is really not possible then say before you start the round what the basic system is.

 

For everyone I want to have said that I really dislike people writing in their Tourney Description "No Polish Club" and such.

 

POLISH CLUB IS NOT AN EVIL SYSTEM IT IS A VERY NATURAL SYSTEM!!!

 

****************************

Some final remark: Please do not take the play on BBO too seriously. There is nothing material to win here, however you can win experience and friends.