[chicoine]

First tourney tonight and I disagree completely with the TD. Help me.


My partner open 1 club -
I bid 1 heart-
My parner 2 nt-
and I bid 3 nt.

She made 5.

The Td correct at 4 because one opp make complaint. My partner had 15 points.

I find this decision unfair. We had a clear top because they others pairs bid 4 spades. I didnot know that she had 15 points whwn i bidded 3nt .......

Ty for helping me.

[1eyedjack]

chicoine, on Aug 7 2004, 12:06 AM, said:

First tourney tonight and I disagree completely with the TD. Help me.


My partner open 1 club -
I bid 1 heart-
My parner 2 nt-
and I bid 3 nt.

She made 5.

The Td correct at 4 because one opp make complaint. My partner had 15 points.

I find this decision unfair. We had a clear top because they others pairs bid 4 spades. I didnot know that she had 15 points whwn i bidded 3nt .......

Ty for helping me.

Assuming that you have posted all of the facts of relevance:
I agree with you.

If you have an agreement that 2NT rebid has 15 points, and it was not alerted, and explanation was not requested or not given, then defenders may misdefend and concede an unnecessary trick. That would constitute adjustable damage. Even then an adjustment is not inevitable, if the defence was so bad that they should have taken the trick anyway, although the non-offending side would be given leeway. Not enough information to consider that aspect.

But from the facts stated, TD ruling seems wrong to me.

[chicoine]

Ty for your answer.
Yep. I had no agreement with my partner. It was my first tourney and individual tourney.
I bidded3 nt because she promised 18-19. I didnot know that she had only 15. it is the reason why I find personnaly this decision vey unfair.

To add at that. I have another question similar. If your partner, make a psychic ( 1 psychic year and you got a clear top and opps complaint about that. Does the Td will correct your score. I dont think so. because you have no agreement.
My situation looks similar . I didnot know that she 15 points.

Ty for your reply .

[1eyedjack]

You will find a lot of threads in this forum about psychics.
The laws are clear. A successful psyche keeps its good resulting score.

The only exceptions might be:

1) If you have conventional methods to identify a psyche (then it probably is not a psyche but an agreement).

or

2) If the conditions of the tournament expressly forbid psyches.

or

3) The psyche is apparently "fielded".

[McBruce]

I got this wrong during the tourney and I admit it. I will try to rescore the board for inclusion in my ratings system with 3NT making 5.

Now will the poster admit to the facts he has carefully concealed?

--this was a SAYC-only tournament in which psychs are a sensitive subject.

--that you flooded my screen with constant complaints about the ruling from the time I made it until the time it ended, preventing me from doing the things I normally do to keep things from dragging?

--that you accused me of favoritism after I would not change my ruling in response to your threats? The defender who complained at least was civil. I suggest that you try that approach next time. In another tournament. Not mine.

[chicoine]

Ty to admit your error TD.

First. It was not a psychic by my partner. it was just a bad bid.

Second, if I complaint a lot during tourney, it was because I know bridge and the rule and also I was always polite with you trying to explain to you your wrong decision. I asked you about rules for appeal etc etc.

Sorry if I disturb you a lot but just trying to tell you that you make a bad judgment on that one. We are all humans.

And for finish, I spoke about favoritism because the complainer ( profile indicate mondial expert) and I am sure thathe knows the rule if he put mondial expert.

I will try again your tourney.

Bye

[1eyedjack]

McB - perhaps give chico a bit of slack. Looks like he is new to BBO tourneys (first one?) and may not appreciate the pressures that TDs are under.

[luke warm]

i don't think i've played in one of mcb's tourneys yet... especially since they're all sayc, but what makes a sayc tourney more sensitive to psychs than any other? is this system so inherently bad that it handles psychs even worse than other systems?

i don't know if the jump to 2nt was a bad bid or a psych, but i wouldn't think it matters (if no agreements).. that was the bid, just play the hand and stop whining

[mikestar]

chicoine, on Aug 7 2004, 06:11 AM, said:

... if I complaint a lot during tourney, it was because I know bridge and the rule and also I was always polite with you trying to explain to you your wrong decision.  I asked you about rules for appeal etc etc.

Sorry if I disturb you a lot but just trying to tell you that you make a bad judgment on that one. We are all humans. 

...

I've directed a lot of f2f bridge. My policy is not to be too hard on somone who complains a bit about a ruling at the time I make it. A second complaint later (excluding a formal appeal or a polite informal discussion after the game) will get a warning, a third complaint will get a disciplinary penalty, a fourth will get the complainer ejected.

This is assuming the complainer may be right and has been respectful: no foul language, no insults, no accusations, etc.

If the complainer is disrespectful or is disputing a ruling that is obviously correct (applies the obviously correct law to undisputed facts) I am quite a bit harsher.

McBruce was merciful.

[dogsbreath]

Hi ..
I'd like to know who MADE the complaint ..looks like a clear case of trying to gain an advantage from playing the 'rules' instead of playing bridge.
Another barrister's tourney? ..those sort of appeals really pull my chain.
Rgds Dog.

Quote

furnulum pani nolo

[Gweny]

Well mike then step up and offer to co-direct with mcbruce and you will see why constant harping at td after ruling is nether welcome or acceptable.

Perhaps if people say things like "can you please review blah blah" and then give td time to do it vs keep sending private messages or worse td calls while you are trying to keep up with calls.

People who constantly argue with td do not realize it is not that we are not open to discuss - it is often that we are trying to keep rest of tournament going. Generally someone calls you it is close to end of round, you make decision and then it is round change and you need to do subbing, and any adjustments (which are very time consuming) and THEN you get moment to look at previous one. This may take up to 15 min.

and 15 min is enternity if you are one waiting.

[luke warm]

gweny - part of the trouble is, there are many rulings that are just flat wrong (i know, i've been subject to more than one), and i think a lot of times the players simply grow tired of having rulings go against them (as here), with no rules based reason (that i'm aware of) and tds who seem unwilling to do anything about it

mike - why can't a td just say "i'll look at the board in a moment, when i have more time?"

dog - i agree completely.. why in the world complain about something like this? there was obviously nothing illegal, or even *wrong*, about this bid... the only harm done was to his partner

[chicoine]

Ty all for reply.


Just to be clear .

Tourney was 15 rounds.
I played this one round 10.
TD advise me round 14.
I discuss with him during that I was playing a board during board 15.
And I didnot argurmente a lot, after I see that he didnot change his mind, I asked different questions to know how make appeals.

[mpefritz]

Note that this ended up right. McBruce -- when he had time to review the bidding -- made the correct adjustment. I agree with the above posts about asking for the TD, and if you disagree, mention it to them later when they have time to take another look.

Also, I suspect most players make more errors than TDs. It happens.

fritz

[chicoine]

Very strange , the system here.

I checked yesterday if TD make correction at my score. I saw that he corrected the average but not my position.

Today, i clicked on the same tourney to see if he correct also opps score, but my correction disappear and also there is no correction for opps.

Can someone can explain why ? . The computer cannot corrrect that ??? I find that curious. Or TD reverses again desicion ?

Ty for helping.

[inquiry]

I think you should let this go.

1) you got a horrible ruling and was hosed, you have my deepest sympathies.

2) your post here may make the director a better one, as we all learn from our experiences, and he seems to have learned from this one.

3) a few minutes after the tournment is over, the results can longer be changed

4) Mcbruce suggested he was going to change the results on the web page he runs,which is differnet from what i think you looked at.

5) there are a lot of other tourneys to play in, go win some of those secure in the knowledge of how you should have done in this one.

ben

[luke warm]

ben, you're right... i don't know about chicoine, but when the latest happened to me all i wanted to know was *why*... you know, just let me know the logic behind the ruling... often, if a td will just do that (either admitting the error or standing by the decision), it goes a long way towards placation (if that's a word)... maybe he wants to know that also

[McBruce]

Our original poster here is once again leaving out pertinent facts to support his case.

I received the complaint in his round 11 and spent some time looking at it and discussing with the complaining player before making what I have admitted was the wrong decision. When the score was adjusted the original poster was apparently playing board 14. He makes it seem as though he discussed this with me throughout board 15 only, but in fact the discussion continued long afterwards, distracting me while at least a dozen other slower tables were completing the tournament.

These were the comments made when I told him, after being ordered several times to make a decision while pairs were still playing, that I would not change the score:
"ok . last time i played here . players can cheat by internet i dont mind . but if the td cheat . to favorize a player ..."
"for nothing ... i will not come back ty "
"i saw that you have friends here "

Now I find that he is alleging that I still have done nothing about it, when in fact I have added 4% to his and his partner's session score and subtracted 4% from his opponent's session score before adding the results to the Alphabet Points rating system. I looked at all of the results on the board and the difference between 3N+2 and 3N+1 was about 60%, so in a 15-board tournament this would be a 4% difference. (I know that others will go up or down a small amount but I have a life to live, if you don't mind.)

You will not find this 4% in the BBO results because I cannot change them but you can compare my version to BBO's version and see the difference. I think the original poster went up from 51% to 55%.

The offer to return to play in my tournaments once again, now that you have the ruling you wanted, is declined.

[luke warm]

this hardly seems fair (tho i guess since it's your tourney, 'fair' can be defined by you)... maybe the player was out of line, i don't know.. i do know that when a ruling is *obviously* wrong, it tends to irritate the person involved... it's so blasted hard to understand, y'know?

the tds have the upper hand, no doubt.. hell, maybe that's the way it should be, i don't know... if the player says "horrible ruling, absolutely wrong, i won't be back" the td says "fine, adios"... if the player wants an explanation and goes, in the td's opinion, overboard demanding one, the td says "don't come back" ... whether the player is right or wrong doesn't enter into it

[Trpltrbl]

I have to agree with Gweny, but also need to know that there always new players joining BBO and some might not know all that is going on.
I am sure it happens quit a bit, and I personal think that a director can make a decision, at least in this example, fairly quickly.
Especially since it was a Indi, there probably wasn't any pdship understanding going on.
And adjusting a hand takes all but 5-7 seconds, and in this case there was no reason to do so.
So I think it is more a case of a director getting to busy because he is not sure what to do.

Mike