interesting hand - interesting ruling

[han]

This morning I was playing in an individual at BBO, no special rules specified (BBO rules apply, alert artificial bids, etc.). With everybody red, I picked up x K10xxxxxx Jxxx -, nice hand!

 

Partner opened 1S, RHO passed, what now?

 

As usual, partner's profile didn't tell me anything, so assume some kind of standard system.. what would be your bid?

 

I thought that I was not good enough for 2H, an undiscussed 3H would ask for trouble, and 4H would presumably be a splinter. I couldn't bring myself to pass, and I bid 1NT, any thoughts? I don't think I ever bid notrump at my first turn with an 8-card major before!

 

I was later able to bid hearts, and the opponents ended up playing in 5C doubled -1. +200 was a good result.

 

But the hand was not over, I got a message that the director was now at the table. A little later I got the message that the score was corrected to an average. I asked the director what had happened, and I was told that I was not allowed to bid 1NT with this hand. When I asked why, I was told that I should email BBO if I had complaints. I didn't think that this was important enough to bother BBO people with, and told the director that I had no bad feelings, but that I found it very peculiar. What do you think?

[han]

As an aside, in any standard system I am familiar with, the auction 1S-1NT does not necessarily show a balanced hand. How unbalanced have you ever been? Did I set a record?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

of course you can bid 1NT.

 

The main problem may be, that the director assumes,

you are playing forcing NT, which would be perfect for

this hand.

In this case the 1 NT bid need to be alerted.

 

You could have passed at your first turn,

altough intending to bid hearts later,

altough that this would have been risky

strategie as well.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Chamaco]

The main problem may be, that the director assumes,

you are playing forcing NT, which would be perfect for

this hand.

In this case the 1 NT bid need to be alerted.

You can bid 1NT with such a hand even if it's not forcing.

 

I think the TD ruling was a big mistake.

Of couse I assume it was a non-pay tourney: if such a ruling occurred in a pay tourney, it would be REALLY bad (pay tourney should guarantee directors who know the rules), but in a free tourney I assume we should be more tolerant towards the mistakes of volunteers.

[helene_t]

Sigh. You're allowed to bid whatever you want. Of course, if you assume that partner will understand that 1NT is forcing, you should alert it, but even then it's hard to see why your failur to alert caused dammage to the opponents: they surely won't claim that you had more defense against 5♣ than they expected?

 

Finally, whether the director thinks 1NT was a normal bid or not is irrelevant. Your judgement is as good as his/hers. And even if 1NT was based on terrible judgement, it would not be a violation of any rule except if the rules specify that "Bad judgement is a violation and will automatically lead to adjustment".

 

You should mail the director and tell him/her to read this thread. This is an elementary mistake and will probably happen again unless the director is educated a little bid.

 

As for the side issue: Yes, I think you set a record. Anyway, I would probably bid 1NT as well.

[vang]

hilarious. you may bid 1nt with any hand since it's a LEGAL bid. td should learn the difference between an illegal bid (this is TD's problem) and a bad/unusual bid (that's your problem).

[han]

This was a free tournament, and the director was a volunteer who had to handle a lot of tables. Although I also think that (s)he was wrong about this hand, I really appreciate these tournaments and would never get angry about such a mistake.

 

I do think that the director should have contacted me if (s)he thought that my partner had information that the opponents did not have. In fact, I think it would be right to explain the change in score to me. (but perhaps directors have no time for these things, I have no idea)

[helene_t]

Although I also think that (s)he was wrong about this hand, I really appreciate these tournaments and would never get angry about such a mistake.

So true.

 

But this was not some "Ooops!" mistake which the director would do only under time pressure. It's a kind of mistake that shows a lack of understanding of very elementary rules. If you are able to educate the director in a friendly way, then do so. Since the next player to whom this happens may get angry.

[Free]

First of all, you didn't do anything wrong. What does the TD want? Pass? 2♥? B) Get real. This TD doesn't even know anything about bridge, he probably still lives with HCP and you not allowed to bid with less than 6...

 

Second, the way the adjustment happened is outrageous imo. Your opps clearly talked to the TD in private (so they can say whatever they want), the TD didn't ask your view on the subject, and he runs away from giving an explanation for his incorrect ruling. I in fact would report this to abuse, so he doesn't annoy any other people in the future.

[Fluffy]

I would bid 4♥, but that is not the point, I dunno about the BBO rules, but I guess you were penalized for an HCP psycke more than a shape psycke. (If this is about psyckes, if it about forcing NT then opps and director should learn bridge).

 

Nevertheless, TD's behaviour was rude, I find kinda unfair toadjust a score without even asking the offending pair or letting them explain anything.

 

You cannot post here the TD's name, but would you dare message me privatelly its name so I can avoid him?. Thx.

[mike777]

Frankly I am surprised by the tone in all these responses. Hannie is clearly at fault here. How can we expect to win if we cannot chat with TD in private if we get a poor score?

1) Hannie cannot bid 1nt with only 4 hcp

2) a void

3) a stiff

4) 8 hearts

5) 2h, 3h and 4h is out

6) psyche is not allowed in polite bridge

7) cannot raise p with a stiff s

8) pass is out since we may have game

 

It seems clear from TD reaction they expected a phone call (chat bar) from you before you choose your call. Consider yourself fortunate that they were so understanding TD let you off with just an adjustment.

[inquiry]

Well, you are allowed to bid 1NT unless 1) the tournment rules expressedly forbid psyches. or 2) forcing nt is expressedly forbidden (and even in case 2, this would be a psyche).

 

Under the conditions you suggested (no agreement, individual). I would bid hearts as cheaply as I could each round until partner reletned and let me play the hand. IF the opponents got to 5♣ on that auction (me bidding 2h, then 3h, then 4h), no doubt they would have called the director again, "look at that 2h bid, he doesn't have nearly enough points"...

 

And if you had passed, and they got to five clubs, you got it, they would have called the director again, "how can he possibly pass with eight hearts, this isn't bridge"....lol....

 

Jump to 3♥? That hand is too weak, jump shifts should be strong they would say. Bid 4♥? They call again, he makes a splinter in a suit with 8 cards... next time you have this hand, simply call the director and tell him to adjust the score now... you know it is coming i he rules like this.

[Free]

Mike, in case your post was pure irony:

 

Hannie is clearly at fault here. How can we expect to win if we cannot chat with TD in private if we get a poor score?

If you call the TD, at least have the decency of talking in public, and not behind everybody's back. That way so called offenders can defend themselves properly when someone tells a lie...

 

1) Hannie cannot bid 1nt with only 4 hcp

2) a void

3) a stiff

4) 8 hearts

Well, give her ♠Q and she has 6HCP. What should she bid now?

2♥? No because she ''doesn't have enough strength'' for a 2-level bid

pass? No because she's too strong

1NT? Apparently also 'no' since she still has 8 hearts, a void and a stiff

So what's your bid now??

 

5) 2h, 3h and 4h is out

Obviously since there aren't enough 'HCP', while playing strength is pretty high.

 

6) psyche is not allowed in polite bridge

Psyches ARE allowed in ANY form of bridge. Disallow bridge and you can't psych anymore...

 

7) cannot raise p with a stiff s

Finally we agree with something

 

8) pass is out since we may have game

Apparently the TD thought this hand should pass for some ridiculous reason B)

[Chamaco]

Finally we agree with something

I think Mike was joking and was simpathizing with Hannie :-)

[Free]

Finally we agree with something

I think Mike was joking and was simpathizing with Hannie :-)

look at my first words B)

[scoob]

has anyone considered starting up a TD union?

 

obviously fred & uday (and the bbo staff in general) do not have the time to worry themselves with something like this, so why not take it on ourselves. form a union of TDs who either have some type of previous actual accreditation for directing, or have passed something put together by the union itself, specifically geared towards online directing.

 

having a mass of TDs that are known to be versed in the laws and can be relied upon to not make calls of this nature will attract players to tournaments run by a union accredited director.

 

the usual laws of supply & demand take over from there.

[luke warm]

This was a free tournament, and the director was a volunteer who had to handle a lot of tables.

s o

 

 

w h a t

 

???

 

i also am glad people volunteer, but a horrible ruling coupled with "if you don't like it, email bbo" isn't exactly the kind of attitude a person is likely to respect

[DrTodd13]

Are we fed up enough as a group to get off our butts and create a website where directors can get flow charts to help them make decisions, provide a large set of example problems that they can try and then see how the rules experts judged it, and finally to provide a test to certify that directors have some level of competence? This is not about forcing people to do anything. It is about establishing a respected site from where a directorial certification would be valued. Players could look for it in the profiles of directors and directors would proudly claim it in their profiles.

 

I'm not angry at clueless directors because of their ignorance. We should be a community where we can all improve and part of that is improving your rulings if you are a director. At a minimum, people who get these bad rulings should be able to document what happened and submit it somewhere that people respect and then get an answer back as to how the situation should have been handled. Sometimes the players are mistaken and they need to learn the rules as well so it doesn't necessarily mean that directors are usually wrong. The problem we have now is that nobody respects anybody else's opinion and why should they? How do we know who knows the rules and who doesn't?

[HeartA]

Frankly I am surprised by the tone in all these responses. Hannie is clearly at fault here. How can we expect to win if we cannot chat with TD in private if we get a poor score?

1) Hannie cannot bid 1nt with only 4 hcp

2) a void

3) a stiff

4) 8 hearts

5) 2h, 3h and 4h is out

6) psyche is not allowed in polite bridge

7) cannot raise p with a stiff s

8) pass is out since we may have game

 

It seems clear from TD reaction they expected a phone call (chat bar) from you before you choose your call. Consider yourself fortunate that they were so understanding TD let you off with just an adjustment.

Mike, please excuse me, but I think what you said here doesn't make sense. I don't see any problem to bid 1NT here.

[DrTodd13]

He was being fascetious.

[Rebound]

Regarding ways to ensure the td of your tourney knows what he/she is doing:

 

Whenever I run a tournament, the conditions of contest clearly state I am using the ACBL mid-chart and alert procedure and I provide a link to the site, advising that all rulings I make will adhere to the laws. This allows anyone who doubts my ruling to look it up for him/herself.

 

To wit: in the first tourney I ran, I encountered this gem of a player. He opened 2♦. When asked what it was by his RHO, he said, "Multy (sic)". When RHO again asked for a description, he said, "it's multy, please bid." He refused to provide further information to the opponents and continued to insist the auction continue. When I arrived, I asked what the problem was. He said that RHO is an expert and should know what multy 2 diamonds is. I said that is irrelevant and warned him that he must provide an explanation of the agreed strength and distribution for the call and that the name of a convention was not sufficient. He still would not tell the opponents anything. So, although a major suit game was bid by only one other pair with the opposing cards, I explained to him and to the opponents once the hand was over, that since he would not explain the bid, I was forced to adjust the score. I adjusted it to 4♥ = in accordance with the law which states the opponents will receive the most favorable result that was at all likely if the irregularity did not occur. I invited the offender to look it up.

 

I suppose I should add that if you disagree with this ruling, I would appreciate a response explaining why, for my own edification.

[han]

I would bid 4♥, but that is not the point, I dunno about the BBO rules, but I guess you were penalized for an HCP psycke more than a shape psycke. (If this is about psyckes, if it about forcing NT then opps and director should learn bridge).

 

Nevertheless, TD's behaviour was rude, I find kinda unfair toadjust a score without even asking the offending pair or letting them explain anything.

 

You cannot post here the TD's name, but would you dare message me privatelly its name so I can avoid him?. Thx.

I won't tell you the name Fluffy, nor will I contact abuse. I did give the TD the link to this thread, and I hope that they will read it.

 

As an aside: Frederick, I am a "he", but thanks for the compliment.

[pigpenz]

people bid 1nt all the time with unbalanced hands!

But as far as trick taking potential i would always bid 2♥ with this hand :P

Points are only a guideline losing trickcount wise this hand this is a monster :D

Heck I know some who migh topen this 2♣'s if given the opportunity.

[cherdano]

The ruling is obvious. You need 6hcp to bid, with 5 or less you have to pass. 1NT is a gross overbid in playing strength!

(I am still trying to construct an auction where this 1NT bid would damage opponents, however... :D )

 

Seriously, I think it's close between 1NT and 2♥ playing without agreements. As opener, I would be a bit surprised about the 4♥ splinter opposite my shortness, but I doubt I would pass it...

 

Arend

[DrTodd13]

Cherdano,

 

You seem to be ignorant of law 40A below.

 

Law 40

A. Right to Choose Call or Play

A player may make any call or play (including an intentionally misleading call - such as a psychic bid - or a call or play that departs from commonly accepted, or previously announced, use of a convention), without prior announcement, provided that such call or play is not based on a partnership understanding.

 

End of discussion. No penalty for somebody bidding 1N or passing this hand whatever they think the best bid is.

 

Todd