[keylime]

Beaner,

When I was up in Canada I used to hate moving; now with Larry I like moving because it kickstarts the brain after an early wakeup (God I am SO not a morning person - where's the Starbucks again in downtown Nashville?) and more importantly after dinner.

Give you a hint: if using pickup slips, I put them right behind the pass cards to keep them out of the way. If using the long travellers I fold it into 3rd's if not already and place it under the bid box. The lack of visual distraction for me helps to keep focus.

[Elianna]

jillybean2, on Dec 4 2006, 04:31 PM, said:

We arrived too late to get an EW seat and so I ended up sitting North and scoring for the first time.

That was just amazing to me! At the club where I direct, if you are able to move, you must make a reservation WAY in advance to get a NS seat (usually a week or more). And by able to move, I mean you don't have a walker. I've had some ladies play EW who had canes. And every player at my club seems to have a bad back so they can't move. Funny thing is, some of these bad backers can get up to smoke after every round.

I usually prefer to sit EW so it's less rude to get up from the table to get away from people. the only exception is if I happen to be carrying a lot of things for one reason or another.

[mike777]

Elianna, on Dec 5 2006, 06:37 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Dec 4 2006, 04:31 PM, said:

We arrived too late to get an EW seat and so I ended up sitting North and scoring for the first time.

That was just amazing to me! At the club where I direct, if you are able to move, you must make a reservation WAY in advance to get a NS seat (usually a week or more). And by able to move, I mean you don't have a walker. I've had some ladies play EW who had canes. And every player at my club seems to have a bad back so they can't move. Funny thing is, some of these bad backers can get up to smoke after every round.

I usually prefer to sit EW so it's less rude to get up from the table to get away from people. the only exception is if I happen to be carrying a lot of things for one reason or another.

Yep very true in my exp in Southern Cal but that was ok.....just knew I was always ew

[iggygork]

A lot of pairs do seem to have a great interest in getting N/S seating (they must like bookkeeping), so much that ACBL even quizzes its prospective directors on the director's exam about how to facilitate this. To wit:

Bonus question from ACBL Director's Exam: You have a 5 table Howell movement. Two pairs show up, both requesting stationary seat assignments. What do you do?

[blackshoe]

That's not really a "N/S" seating question, but more a "how do you modify a Howell if you need to have two stationary pairs" question.

At one of the games at which I direct from time to time, we have two players for whom moving after every round is undesirable, due to physical disabilities. It has nothing to do with preferring to sit N/S.

The answer to the question, btw, is "run a reduced Howell", that being a Howell with two stationary pairs, and therefore eight instead of nine (for a five table game) moving pairs, and eight instead of nine rounds. In North America, a reduced Howell is more often called a three-quarter Howell.

[mycroft]

Depending on the exact question asked, you can play with a phantom table (requires a seating card) and tell everyone that when they have to play pair X (1 by preference, in ACBL standard howells where top pair is stationary) to take the boards and go to the phantom instead. If there's some mobility, such that one of the two stationaries can move *once*, this allows all 9 rounds (but the TD has to keep a very close eye on things!)

If what happened is that the two pairs came late, I pull out Groner, just to make sure, and run an Appendix Howell. I deal with the one board that got played by the "wrong pairs" if I have to make both late pairs stationary, put one of the pairs stationary NS at table 1, and the other EW at table 6, and they relay all night, with everyone going NS1 playing NS6. Again, lots of work for the TD, but it does work.

As far as N/S and ACBL goes, it's not really the "I want to score", or "I'm too fragile to move" (although those do exist, and we deal with them), it's "I have a big coat, a big purse, my footrest, my coffee, and my scorecard, and I just want to stash them and go." If they're North, they're Lord of the Table, and woe betide anyone who wishes to change *that*. Also, many places will put the sit-out E/W all the time (including if there's a skip), so the "I want N/S" players never miss a board (I do my best to ensure that the sitout is 60% N/S, to break this up a bit - and boy do I get complaints. On the other hand, I try very hard to fill tables, first, so there isn't a sitout).

For some reason, the "require stationaries" tend to be stronger (or, rarely, much weaker) than average, and the wannabe stationaries are the experienced non-experts who show up 45 minutes early for the privilege of sitting N/S - so the N/S field in any ACBL club I've been in is 3-5% stronger than the E/W field. I try to tell people who are looking for masterpoints that it's easier E/W, but they don't listen... This, added to the griping when our precious players don't get to play N/S, makes seeding the field when that is necessary a political headache for the TD. But we get paid, in part, to dine on the fecal matter, neh?

Michael.

[Elianna]

mycroft, on Dec 6 2006, 06:02 PM, said:

As far as N/S and ACBL goes, it's not really the "I want to score", or "I'm too fragile to move" (although those do exist, and we deal with them), it's "I have a big coat, a big purse, my footrest, my coffee, and my scorecard, and I just want to stash them and go." If they're North, they're Lord of the Table, and woe betide anyone who wishes to change *that*. Also, many places will put the sit-out E/W all the time (including if there's a skip), so the "I want N/S" players never miss a board (I do my best to ensure that the sitout is 60% N/S, to break this up a bit - and boy do I get complaints. On the other hand, I try very hard to fill tables, first, so there isn't a sitout).

My club is ACBL, too, and our main problem is inability to move. I bet that we have an older average population. Our day games seem to have an average age of 80. I'd say 90% are over 70.

We also almost always have N/S have a sit out (when there is one) so that way the boards actually get PASSED. The only time I have an E/W sit out is when we have 6 or 8 tables and so there's a relay-byestand movement (and thus no relay).

[jillybean]

We played in a very nice & well run, 0-1500mp game tonight, finishing 3rd in SectionA with 54.89% I think we played well, but here are the boards that didn’t go so well...

Board24 My partner opened the bidding:
1♣ (P) 1♠ (X)
3♣ (P) 5♣

5♣-1 My partner intended 3♣ as competitive, I jumped to 5♣ thinking 3♣ was strong after the X
I see we need some more agreements here.

Board22 With stiff K♦ I downgraded this hand and missed game, should we have bid it?

Scoring: MP

P (P) 1♣ (P)
1♠ (X) 2♠ (3♦)
3♠ AP

---

Board21 A total bottom for us was 6♥-1 everyone else played in 4♥, I cant remember the exact hand, I had 11 points and ♥AKx and ♠Axxx.

1♥ (1♠) 2♠ (P)
3♣ : 3♠
4nt : 5♦ (1430)
6♥

We lost A♦ and the Q♥ when ♥'s split x/Qxx

jb

[helene_t]

Hi Kathryn, congratualations with your good results!

3♣ competitive or strong? It makes a lot of sense to play it as competitive but then you need to agree how to show 16-17 HCPs. If you don't play support rdbl, you can use rdbl as a generic strength-showing call, and bids showing shape only, even if reverse or jump. Otherwise, it's easier to ignore the dbl although I'm sure some gadgets have been invented for this situation. In this auction there's not much difference between pass and 1NT, and with a hand suited for a reverse or 2NT you will sometimes want to pass in order to dbl opps later.

Missed game: ♦K looks worthless in this auction so I think it's ok that you didn't reach game. You'll have to agree if 3♠ is constructive or not. Here's what I've learned:
- If there is a bid below 3 of the agreed suit (such as 3♥ here), that bid becomes the generic game try and dbl is more or less penalty-oriented.
- Otherwise, dbl becomes the generic game try.
- In any case, 3 of the agreed suit is just competitive.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#24 The jump to 3C is still strong, he can go slower,
if he only wants to buy the contract
he may even buy the contract in 2C

#22 You have a min in high cards (a wasted King
of diamond)
On the other hand, you have a 9 card fit
in spade and a secondary fit in clubs and shape,
playing IMP's bidding game is normale being red
I think I would bid game, or at least invite
... but 3S is not clear, it may or may not be an
invirtation / competitive
And even if it is inivitational, partner should reject,
since you are a passed hand

#21 Without the specific hands, it is hard to say, but from your
comment, I would say, that 3S is to much, and most likely
you should bid 3H.
Afterall you have already shown a limit raise, and 3C was not
game forcing, it still could be a game try
And you 4 spades indicate, that partner has a singleton, i.e.
the Ace will not be very useful to partner.
But being in Slam, and failing to find the Queen of trumps with
9 cards is hardly a reason to worry a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

Board22 How do I make an invite here, I thought a 3♥ should show some values in ♥'s, inviting partner to game in NT, ♠ or even ♥ (54xx)

Board21 I understood 3♣ to be a cue bid and since we were below game I was cooperating by showing my A♠ We were surprised being the only pair to find 6♠. Obviously something went wrong but it is difficult to review without hand records.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

Board 22 One conventional method of bidding is a 'double at the three level'(after a suit has been bid and raised) is penalty 'if' there is an unbid suit available to invite game. If there is no unbid suit available, double shows an invite in the agreed suit and a bid of the agreee suit is to play.

Playing these methods, 3H would be an invite in spades and a bid of three spades would have been competing 'without trying' for game.

If you follow the LAW, you bid at the 3 level with most hands that have a nine card fit. Hands that are 5332 or 4333 should be devalued when following the LAW.

Regards,
Robert

[pbleighton]

Board 24 - I would take 3C as strong (the normal meaning without the double).

Board 22 - 2S is fine, but your pd should have bid 4S instead of 3S, he has 13 hcp, the AK of trumps, and another ace.

Peter

[JoAnneM]

A couple of comments:

1. I don't believe anyone touched on something from Jillybean's original post, and that is her husband's bid after the hesitation. I hope she realizes that it probably was not a legal bid and if the director had been called something would have been done (assuming a competent director). Unlike online bridge where taking advantage of hesitations is not really enforced or proven, it is quite easy to establish it in a ftf game.

2. Having a "stationary e/w" table in a Mitchell movement is quite easy and at my game we do it quite frequently. It involves a pair who can neither move nor keep score. They are assigned their e/w number but sit at an unnumbered table off to the side and the n/s players take their table markers and boards to that table to play.

3. Every one of my games is seeded. Seats are assigned as people register, actually we have a fantastic partnership program and we know pretty much know down to the half table who is coming and we run 10-11 table games, so we can lay out the seeding ahead of time and make adjustments as necessary. It takes a while to learn who likes which direction but it all works out. And then we have the nicest players of all who don't care where they sit.

My favorite quote: "Be part of the solution, not part of the problem"

[jillybean]

JoAnneM, on Dec 19 2006, 05:15 PM, said:

A couple of comments:

1.  I don't believe anyone touched on something from Jillybean's original post, and that is her husband's bid after the hesitation.  I hope she realizes that it probably was not a legal bid and if the director had been called something would have been done (assuming a competent director).  Unlike online bridge where taking advantage of hesitations is not really enforced or proven, it is quite easy to establish it in a ftf game.
"

Yes I did realise we were in situation where potential UI had been passed and considered calling the TD myself. If we had made 4♠ I have no doubt he would have then called the TD. On seeing dummy go down I think it was obvious that my hesitation was caused by not knowing what the heck I was doing, made worse for me by the opps comments during the pause. The contract failed miserably and they got a top board - no TD call

fwiw if 4♠ had made and then the td was called would that be handled the same as when the TD is called immeditaely after the hesitation? How do you guard against the opps taking a double shot here?

Reviewing hesitations or not online is a choice the TD makes, imho there is no reason to treat it any differently to r/l hessitation.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

fwiw if 4♠ had made and then the td was called would that be handled the same as when the TD is called immeditaely after the hesitation? How do you guard against the opps taking a double shot here?

You don't. If your side committed an infraction, the opponents get a double shot here, that's your penalty for the infraction. If 4♠ goes down you keep your bad result, they aren't damaged so no adjustment. If 4♠ makes, & the 4♠ was deemed to be suggested by unauthorized information, they were damaged, & your side gets 170 only (+ any overtricks).

Now whether your side committed an infraction depends on more details, particularly your system agreements. If you have some special (rather unusual) agreement that 2♠-3♠ was game invitational, rather than blocking, then if he had a good weak 2 then bidding on is fine. But without special agreements, then it would be clear that 4♠ was suggested by the hesitation & would get rolled back if it made (for most players; if it could be established that opener is a rather raw beginner, & has no knowledge about the usual responses to weak twos, no concept of blocking bids, & simply thought that this sequence was invitational, then 4♠ might be allowed).

If you want to avoid giving opponents double shots, then you take note when partner breaks tempo (or other UI like fingering bidding cards before passing, or mistaken alerts/explanations, etc.), decide what the logical alternative actions are, decide which if any of these actions are suggested by the UI, then avoid taking those actions. If 3♠ had been passed, you keep your score always, since passing is the only logical alternative for most people on that auction. By bidding 4♠ a heads I lose, tails they win situation is created.

I really wish that in beginner classes the teachers would give a bit of a primer on the proprieties of the game, ones responsibilities when there are misexplanations & breaks in tempo. It is rarely done; new players then get the wrong idea & feel persecuted when they get the director called on them, since they had no idea that they did anything improper.

[blackshoe]

jillybean2, on Dec 19 2006, 07:45 PM, said:

fwiw if 4♠ had made and then the td was called would that be handled the same as when the TD is called immeditaely after the hesitation? How do you guard against the opps taking a double shot here?

Certainly. TD has to get the facts in either case - including whether the call was based on "I think somebody took advantage of UI" or "We got a bad score, waah, waah".

Quote

Reviewing hesitations or not  online is a choice the TD makes, imho there is no reason to treat it any differently to r/l hessitation.

Um. I agree that there is no reason to treat them differently. I'm not so sure about this "choice" thing. On what basis is the online TD making this choice?

[jillybean]

blackshoe, on Dec 19 2006, 07:37 PM, said:

Quote

Reviewing hesitations or not  online is a choice the TD makes, imho there is no reason to treat it any differently to r/l hessitation.

Um. I agree that there is no reason to treat them differently. I'm not so sure about this "choice" thing. On what basis is the online TD making this choice?

What I mean here is that some TD’s consider since BIT online can be caused by external influences all BIT is disregarded and they will not rule on BITs.
Others acknowledge that a BIT did occur and make a ruling on the use of the UI

[blackshoe]

A BIT is not in itself an infraction of law. And it may or may not convey UI. TD is required to use judgement. That's why we get paid the big bucks.

The mere fact that a BIT occurred does not necessarily call for a ruling. But if the players call the TD and say "there was a break in tempo, we believe there subsequently may have been an infraction" the TD is derelict in his duty if he refuses to make a ruling - and I would count an automatic "no infraction" as such refusal. Yes, it's harder online, because of the possibility of loss of connectivity. Some have said that they would also excuse other external causes, such as a phone call, but... - you know what? In every f2f game I've played in over the last few years, one of the rules is "turn off your cell phone!" I think you can guess how I feel about folks dropping out of an online game to answer the phone. Get an answering machine! Anyway, the fact that it's harder to decide on UI rulings where lag or connection loss may have been involved doesn't absolve the TD of his responsibility. I don't expect him to get it right every time. I do expect him to try.

[jillybean]

It is even a little easier for the TD, on BBO loss of connectivity is signaled by a red dot on the user name.
This leaves other distractions that are out of the players control happening at the exact same time that a bid is required and where the pause could have conveyed UI to your partner. I believe the chances of this happening are very small.