kb49 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 EBU We encountered this problem some time ago and were unable to resolve it. In one Sims event a board was played at one table for the first time. Players had been asked to check the travellers at the end of play to ensure the that the hands had been correctly recorded. It had not and it was necessary to cancel the hand and make the necessary correction for future play. Both pairs were given an average plus because they were not to blame for this error. At the end of play it was noted that everybody had bid and made 3NT. Without the error everybody would have got an average score. Many players felt that average plus should not have been awarded. What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanor Fow Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 The laws are quite clear on this, if there is no fault on either side it should be ave+/ave+ as awarded. I agree with this, in pretty much any field I've been in I've seen some 'usual' scores, and even boards which might seem like they are likely to be completely flat often have one or more scores that are not the same. Even if there is little chance of more than the nine tricks in NT, people make mistakes, there could be a mess up in the bidding leading to a different contract, the defence could be abysmal and so coudl the declarer play, someone could play the wrong card, revoke, or make any of a hundred different mistakes. All of these things happen regulaly even on the simplest of boards. By not being able to play the boad both partnerships have been denied the opportunity for a brilliancy, or a mistake from their opponants. Average plus seems fair even on the flattest boards. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 One of the things about bridge is that you sometimes get good scores through no special effort of your own. Usually it's because your opponents gave you a gift, but in this case the gift came from whoever made the board. Stuff happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 I would suggest that the "+" for each side come from the table that fouled the board. If that's the TD - well, I guess they owe the room one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 In response to the OP, I agree with A+ to both sides. I also agree that stuff happens, and that when it does, players should just accept it and move on. As for "the table that fouled the board," as I read the OP, there wasn't one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejonnie Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Happened last night at our Club (or something similar) Initially we were playing a 9.5 table movement and our first board was board 10. Bidding (1 Diamond: 2 Clubs: 2 Diamonds: 2 Hearts: Pass: 5 Clubs) At which point another pair walked in and the Director switched to a 10 table Mitchell, meaning the boards were moved. Several rounds later we come to play board 10 again. So I call the TD and explain the position and, (to speed up time although technically I shouldn't) the correct procedure. Bidding (1 Diamond: 2 Clubs: 2 Diamonds: 2 SPADES: Pass: 4 SPADES) Board has to be cancelled (auction different). We played it for fun and 4 Spades made exactly. This would have scored below average for NS and above average for us as EW. Since neither side was at fault the Director (correctly IMHO) scored it as av+ av+. At the end of the evening NS and EW were tied on the same percentage. (Really!) So had the board not been av+sd we would have been one place higher. I have no complaints, the ruling was correct. What surprised me is that no OTHER pair called the director! Maybe we were just too quick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Happened last night at our Club (or something similar) Initially we were playing a 9.5 table movement and our first board was board 10. [...] At which point another pair walked in and the Director switched to a 10 table Mitchell, meaning the boards were moved. Several rounds later we come to play board 10 again. So I call the TD and explain the position and, (to speed up time although technically I shouldn't) the correct procedure. [...] Me very confused. Are the Mitchell movements of boards and pairs for 9.5 tables and 10 tables not identical except for the fact that there is one sitout in the first case? Why did boards have to be moved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted September 17, 2014 Report Share Posted September 17, 2014 Me very confused. Are the Mitchell movements of boards and pairs for 9.5 tables and 10 tables not identical except for the fact that there is one sitout in the first case? Why did boards have to be moved? It seems that the initial movement was not a Mitchell movement, but a Howell or something else. It is still a mystery why the boards were moved. 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.