another ruling

[LH2650]

12C3 rulings can be made by TDs in, for example, England.

Not in the ACBL, however.

123C: Unless Zonal Organizations specify otherwise, an appeals committee may vary an assigned adjusted score in order to do equity.

 

There is no option to give this authority to the Director. However, in the current effort to revise the Laws, there has been discussion of giving this authority to the Chief Director.

[david_c]

123C:  Unless Zonal Organizations specify otherwise, an appeals committee may vary an assigned adjusted score in order to do equity.

 

There is no option to give this authority to the Director.

Although this is certainly what the 1997 laws say, in fact things have moved on here in England and TDs are allowed to give weighted scores, as Frances said.

 

From the EBU White Book 2004:

 

12.1.4     Weighted scores

Law 12C3 allows an Appeals Committee to vary an assigned adjusted score to achieve equity. Following recommendations by the World Bridge Federation endorsed by the European Bridge League it is now permitted for TDs to do this as well as Appeals Committees.

 

Note   TDs have beeen permitted to give such adjustments in England from 1st August 2000. This includes TDs at all levels, ie including club TDs.

 

Of course this is all rather irrelevant to what should happen in an online game. But still, it's probably worth pointing out that most people in England seem to think this rule is rather good.

[shoeless]

Man I am soooo with The Hog on this one - an appropriate score adjustment and a polite "Please alert this bid in future" will go a long way to making this site a place where people want to stay and play. When a director is absolutely sure the player knows better - then maybe a procedural penalty is in order to try and curb the behavior - can anyone be that sure?

[mike777]

Man I am soooo with The Hog on this one - an appropriate score adjustment and a polite "Please alert this bid in future"  will go a long way to making this site a place where people want to stay and play.  When a director is absolutely sure the player knows better - then maybe a procedural penalty is in order to try and curb the behavior - can anyone be that sure?

I sooooo disagree, the failure to alert is not the number one issue. The guessing what the contract should be is not the number one issue.

 

Number one issue is the failure of east to reply to TD and I assume failure to reply to opp. If East is being rude, then asking them to alert is not going to solve issue. If east connection is so poor they can never respond to TD and OPP questions then asking them to alert again does not solve issue. IF convention is not allowed in tourney or CC is unclear, again asking them to alert does not solve issue.

 

As Jilly added, even if they do not speak English, they could type and respond in their own language with "DO NOT UNDERSTAND". At least that is making an effort to have good manners.

[LH2650]

12.1.4     Weighted scores

Law 12C3 allows an Appeals Committee to vary an assigned adjusted score to achieve equity. Following recommendations by the World Bridge Federation endorsed by the European Bridge League it is now permitted for TDs to do this as well as Appeals Committees.

 

I just got a flash of inspiration! Jilly actually made a 12C3 ruling! She determined that equity was Average and Average Minus, and varied the assigned adjusted score to achieve this.