[awm]

There was a fistfight at the Beverly Hills bridge club a few years back. I wasn't there for the actual event, but apparently they had to cancel the game that afternoon. I showed up for the evening game and it was much bigger than usual since everyone from the cancelled afternoon game had received free plays. One of the perpetrators of the fight actually showed up to the evening game and was allowed to play! In fact one of the better players in the club suggested that I should play with this individual at some future date, an invitation I politely declined.

Anyways I see that enforcement of ZT isn't much different elsewhere. Kind of sad really. You'd think that physical violence would at least be sufficient to trigger some sort of penalty (I know that insulting my partner, and continuing to berate her after being told to be quiet by the director, is not sufficient for a ZT penalty).

[blackshoe]

barmar, on Oct 31 2006, 02:27 PM, said:

Shouldn't we be thankful that declarer is still alive? It seems like a bruised arm is minor compared to the infamous case where Mrs. Bennett murdered Mr. Bennett due to a bad bid in a "friendly" game of rubber bridge, and the judge ruled justifiable homicide. And this is apparently not apocryphal, see Snopes.

I think there was more to Mrs. Bennett's motive than her husband's light opening. And Mrs. Bennett was acquiited by a jury, not by a judge ruling "justifiable homicide". According to the Snopes link you posted, the jury decided the death was accidental.

This part may be apocryphal, but then again it may not: I have read that a large part of the reason for the acquital was perhaps that Mrs. Bennett was young and attractive, and that the jurors were mostly, if not all, male.

[blackshoe]

"Zero Tolerance" is really unnecessary. All it says is "we're gonna enforce the rules against bad behavior." Pfui. Don't yammer about it, just do it!

[jillybean]

As long as someone is benefiting for each butt on a seat and the general membership tolerates this behavior nothing will change. Why enforce ZT and risk reducing your profit?

[matmat]

heh. i doubt there are many people who have posted here who have not, at one time or another, wanted to punch their p or opponent in the face. of course sanity prevailed (or perhaps fear of consequences) and none of us have done this.

to actually exert physical violence during a non-contact sport such as bridge is quite uncalled for...

I've also found that some directors wish to avoid confrontation at all cost. Had a boistrous opp accuse my p of cheating (didn't quite say the magic word, but it was quite clear what he was implying). Director said nothing, and instead gave a split ruling on a hand to appease the opponent that rather stupidly bid himself into -800.

c'est la vie. money rules, rules of decorum are secondary.

[h2osmom]

Zero tolerance is a difficult thing for directors. The people who are likely to commit these offenses are the same people who will not take kindly to receiving a penalty for their behaviour. People who will accept the penalty without fussing (or worse) at the director, generally won't commit these offenses, and are not the people ZT policies were ever intended for. Directors tend to want to smooth things out and get the game back moving, rather than possibly exacerbating an already bad situation.

I don't agree that this reaction from directors is optimal; I think they should enforce ALL ZT actions. Of course occasionally a person who said something with no malice intended, or taken, will be penalized, but overall, if this policy is actually enforced to that level, behaviour will improve. But initially, it will be difficult for directors to confront aggressive people.

[ladydoc]

An ironical update:

This in almost exactly one week since the 'incident' at the club.

As expected, the acbl has no executive function in this matter, and it all came down to the club to deal with it.

Last week was a horrendous week. I was in shock at the way people were behaving, and appalled there was no phone call to apologise from the perpetrator.
That director of last monday night went off on holidays. The club president is still investigating, but I think that is only of interest to the club at this point.

I did report to the police and had the photos taken, and I skipped bridge on Friday night. Usually there are barely enough people on a friday night to have three tables. .... but Friday, there were 4 full even without us ... strange... what could this mean?

On Monday, I decided to go back to bridge...
And believe me, it was difficult..

I was met at the door by my friend, the director of the night, and I played with her, instead of my husband, who then played with her regular partner. I felt like I had a wonderful bodyguard by my side.
The club president welcomed me back to the club, and gave me a helpful head's up, while out in the hall, that the perpetrator was inside, and did I feel strong enough emotionally to play at the same table? I said, no, I didn't think so. He said, well, if it came to be a problem, he would somehow arrange something, but I was not to be pressured, just come and tell him.

When we sat down... I was amazed! There were almost twice the number of people there as usual! What an good assault does to raise attendance!!!! The perpetrator and his partner left then, before the game started, thank god!

My partner and I had a 62.5 % game to come second in the night in the Howell movement and it was a pleasant evening. The couple who won were from out of town and new to the community. I do hope that things change in the club, and they are welcomed to a friendly non violent atmosphere.

[jikl]

I am really pleased things are looking up.

Sean

[GeeGee]

Yes, stick with it.

People like this should be thrown out of the game, perhaps not for good, but until they show true repentance.

Geoff

[1stpanda]

Many years ago a friend of mine was barred from his local bridge club because he broke another player's fist with his jaw. (Yes, that's right. My friend is 6'-4" and the other party to the altercation was considerably smaller and older.) Needless to say, the other party to the altercation was also a friend of the director.

So this is not the worst ruling with regard to physical assault in the history of the ACBL. But it has to be in the top 5.

[ladydoc]

You know, 1st Panda, now I can believe that utterly!

I wonder if there is any bridge club in the world without its intrigues and jealousies.
I think the emotions run higher at team games too, because it may come down to who asks you to play first, or if the team you form seems to be unequally stacked.

My husband says that when he played in Edmonton, the wise owner of the bridge club sent all the best players off to play rubber bridge, and that solution satisfied most people, because then other people got to win in the other section of the club.

I was also realizing that if the perpetrator of the assault on me at the table had lifted his fist and pounded my arm, it would not have cause more damage than what he did do (wringing it forcibly) , but it would have been more visible, and perhaps have elicited a more negative result on him at the time.
He attacked like a sulky angry cowardly person.