How do you go about this tactfully

[Cyberyeti]

Opponents are playing a strange bit of system using ambiguous bids that you don't see how it can possibly work without an outside tell, yet they always seem to "guess" right.

 

Example: MPs

 

They defend your weak NT with a 2♣ bid that is 4+-4+ either way round ♣/M and have no penalty double, this bid is made after a little thought.

 

You hold a 3343 12 count opposite it with Kxx or Qxx in clubs and both majors, what do you do ?

 

It would appear you have enough to expect you might make, so wouldn't you play in partner's major to try for 110 rather than 90, and give him another go in case he has a good hand ? Apparently not, passed without much thought, which was a good thing as partner who is unlimited had good clubs, bad hearts and not enough to make more than 2.

[billw55]

I would need more than that to say anything about it. A suboptimal decision is entirely plausible.

 

In fact, I think that playing bad conventions actually makes it more likely that they will play them poorly. After all, they already demonstrated poor decision making by playing the convention to begin with.

 

Alternatively you could call the director for a hesitation UI ruling, if you think "after a little thought" was enough. Then he will examine LAs, what is indicated, damage, the whole nine yards. Even if the ruling is not in your favor, it will show them that you are paying attention, which might be a deterrent if any actual cheating is going on.

[Cyberyeti]

There are lots of things like this where you pick up a slight BiT, they'll deny there was one, my partner never notices anything not measured in minutes from me or opps. Another common one is where you play some complicated signalling/discard system and you don't have the card you need to mean what you want it to mean, or can't afford it. Partner notices the slight break and ignores the signal.

[billw55]

OK, I think I misunderstood, from your OP I thought you were suggesting some kind of deliberate illegal signal.

 

If you are talking about use of unintentional UI from tempo, then I think that director calls is all you can do. Are you sure they deny the break in tempo - have you tried mentioning it?

[barmar]

OK, I think I misunderstood, from your OP I thought you were suggesting some kind of deliberate illegal signal.

Well, the OP did say "they always seem to get it right", which might suggest something like that.

 

But it's probably not really as common as he thinks. We tend to remember the ones that work, and not all the times they guess wrong. It's like the people who post that the BBO dealer in robot games always makes the human's finesses fail.

[Cyberyeti]

OK, I think I misunderstood, from your OP I thought you were suggesting some kind of deliberate illegal signal.

 

If you are talking about use of unintentional UI from tempo, then I think that director calls is all you can do. Are you sure they deny the break in tempo - have you tried mentioning it?

 

I play against them 2 or 3 times a year, but it's happened on the last 2 occasions. I don't know if it's deliberate, and in a sense it doesn't matter.

 

The other occasion it often occurs is escaping from 1Nx where some partnerships seem to have rescue redoubles which they miraculously use at the right time every time when they're just as likely to be wrong as right (with several suits of the same length).

[jallerton]

Opponents are playing a strange bit of system using ambiguous bids that you don't see how it can possibly work without an outside tell, yet they always seem to "guess" right.

 

Example: MPs

 

They defend your weak NT with a 2♣ bid that is 4+-4+ either way round ♣/M and have no penalty double, this bid is made after a little thought.

 

You hold a 3343 12 count opposite it with Kxx or Qxx in clubs and both majors, what do you do ?

 

It would appear you have enough to expect you might make, so wouldn't you play in partner's major to try for 110 rather than 90, and give him another go in case he has a good hand ? Apparently not, passed without much thought, which was a good thing as partner who is unlimited had good clubs, bad hearts and not enough to make more than 2.

 

This might depend on the rest of their system. Many people have a way of showing a single-suiter in a major at the 2-level, but no equivalent way of showing a single-suiter in a minor. With say ♠Ax ♥ Jxxx ♦xx ♣KQJ10x they would bid 2♣ showing a 2-suiter including clubs, but with the suits the other way round, say ♠Ax ♥ KQJ10x ♦xx ♣Jxxx they would just show the hearts. This means that when 2♣ is selected and the partner is 3-3, they are more likely to have an 8-card fit in clubs than in the major, so passing 2♣ does have some logic to it.

[ggwhiz]

The trouble with this situation if they are wired (and it's far from clear) is that if you mention something or other, tactful or not they would play straight up against you and drill everyone else. We had a pair get away with it for years.

 

Call the Director with a gentle just in case disclaimer that there may be UI (or worse but unspoken) as often as you feel you can and hope to build a body of evidence. We had a small army do this for the pair mentioned above and it still didn't do the job.

 

The recorder system in the ACBL was supposed to handle stuff like this but guess what? It doesn't work.

[pran]

May I humbly remind of my fellow countryman Boye Brogeland who took on the difficult task of fighting illegal communication between partners?

Just consider what he has been through and the tremendous amount of intelligence that was required to pin his targets.

[blackshoe]

The recorder system in the ACBL was supposed to handle stuff like this but guess what? It doesn't work.

Why doesn't it work?

[ggwhiz]

Why doesn't it work?

 

The typical recorder form is filed and disappears with no apparent follow up. I was the recorder for my Unit for 4 years and filed several of them and never heard a word back from anyone. That includes one pair that I know for a fact were recorded for the same actions in another jurisdiction.

 

Somewhere buried in a BW thread Peg Kaplan recalled recording a pair, hearing nothing and contacting the ACBL to inquire. They knew nothing about it and eventually told her that the form was apparently lost.

[blackshoe]

There seem to be two problems, then, or maybe three: 1. Administration of the system is flawed. 2. Players don't know about it. 3. Players do know about it, but don't use it.

 

How should we fix these problems?

[ggwhiz]

There seem to be two problems, then, or maybe three: 1. Administration of the system is flawed. 2. Players don't know about it. 3. Players do know about it, but don't use it.

 

How should we fix these problems?

 

There has been a suggestion for a recorder form online at the ACBL site that can be filled in and go directly into the pipeline. After that, all we need is a (staffed) pipeline. Imo, lots of players know about the current system but don't use it knowing it is currently a dead end.

[blackshoe]

Do two reports constitute a pattern? How much of "it's currently a dead end" is because players don't submit memos?

 

I dunno. The existing system sure sounds like it ought to work. If it doesn't because people are dragging their feet, I'm not sure how to fix that.

[Vampyr]

May I humbly remind of my fellow countryman Boye Brogeland who took on the difficult task of fighting illegal communication between partners?

Just consider what he has been through and the tremendous amount of intelligence that was required to pin his targets.

 

It helps to have video evidence and data on bids and plays.

[pran]

May I humbly remind of my fellow countryman Boye Brogeland who took on the difficult task of fighting illegal communication between partners?

Just consider what he has been through and the tremendous amount of intelligence that was required to pin his targets.

It helps to have video evidence and data on bids and plays.

Sure.

And what chance does the ACBL recorder system (or any similar c... fighting system) stand in comparison?

[nullve]

had good clubs, bad hearts and not enough to make more than 2.

So you let them play 2♣ in their 8-card fit?

[Cyberyeti]

So you let them play 2♣ in their 8-card fit?

 

7 card fit, 4 good clubs, 4 bad hearts.

[pigpenz]

I was District 20 recorder after H Sharpels....90-93....back then I was thinking of using Fred's Bridge Base for a database on the cases turned in...back then there was barely email and def no browsers. When I was replaced no one asked for forms or cared so down the shredder they went.

 

Now days with all the tech we have there is no reason to not have an ACBL recorder site where forms can be turned in and maybe a database that can be assessed by District, National, and Unit recorders. At the club level I don't know, a lot of people who think they are good have terrible agreements or lack of them. Most people at the club level don't really care. I often ask people why this or that occurred and no one can ever remember the hands even with handrecords.

 

All of this would be great but I don't know how much it would get used at lower levels of competition.

[blackshoe]

I was District 20 recorder after H Sharpels....90-93....back then I was thinking of using Fred's Bridge Base for a database on the cases turned in...back then there was barely email and def no browsers. When I was replaced no one asked for forms or cared so down the shredder they went.

 

Now days with all the tech we have there is no reason to not have an ACBL recorder site where forms can be turned in and maybe a database that can be assessed by District, National, and Unit recorders. At the club level I don't know, a lot of people who think they are good have terrible agreements or lack of them. Most people at the club level don't really care. I often ask people why this or that occurred and no one can ever remember the hands even with handrecords.

 

All of this would be great but I don't know how much it would get used at lower levels of competition.

I would think it would be routine for an outgoing recorder to turn over his files to his successor — without being asked.

 

I agree that the system can be improved — and that if people won't use it, it's not very useful.

[johnu]

Now days with all the tech we have there is no reason to not have an ACBL recorder site where forms can be turned in and maybe a database that can be assessed by District, National, and Unit recorders. At the club level I don't know, a lot of people who think they are good have terrible agreements or lack of them. Most people at the club level don't really care. I often ask people why this or that occurred and no one can ever remember the hands even with handrecords.

 

 

There is an online recorder form now.

 

https://web3.acbl.org/player-memo

 

I read about this on the Bridgewinners site. I'm not sure if there is a link to this from the main ACBL site.

 

Is this hooked up to a database? or does it just generate a PDF file that gets emailed to somebody? Given the state of the ACBL IT department, it's not clear to me what they are doing.

[pigpenz]

There is an online recorder form now.

 

https://web3.acbl.org/player-memo

 

I read about this on the Bridgewinners site. I'm not sure if there is a link to this from the main ACBL site.

 

Is this hooked up to a database? or does it just generate a PDF file that gets emailed to somebody? Given the state of the ACBL IT department, it's not clear to me what they are doing.

Looks like it should be hooked up to a database of somekind, but def. looks like its for Regionals, Nationals, or Sectionals.....club games I don't know.

[blackshoe]

Looks like it should be hooked up to a database of somekind, but def. looks like its for Regionals, Nationals, or Sectionals.....club games I don't know.

It should be, it could be, but we don't know if it is.

 

There is nothing about player memos in the "clubs" tab that I can see. Under the "tournaments" tab this link leads to the form, but there's no obvious clue as to what happens when you hit the "submit" button. And yes, it looks like it's intended for tournaments only. I looked at the code, but if there's a clue there, I don't see it.

 

This form's predecessor let you edit the pdf online, but then you had to save it to your desktop and email it to the recorder.

 

It looks like any form submitted via the website goes directly to the ACBL recorder, which kind of cuts district and unit recorders out of the loop, unless there's a database to which they have access and a notification to the appropriate recorder that there's a new memo for him to look at.

 

Looking at the information directed at clubs, it appears there is no mechanism for submitting a player memo for something that happens at a club. It may be that ACBL have set things up so nobody except the club has jurisdiction over matters that might result in a player memo. In which case it devolves on the club to invent a mechanism for such memos (or copy some of the ACBL's procedures).