[Yzerman]

I play perhaps 5-10 times per year at club games. I am a HUGE advocate of the game, and I try as best as I can to support local bridge. I am HUGE into ethics and rules of bridge as well as helping people learn the game (as best I can). BUT (never start sentence with but, but - he,he), I just find 'club' bridge too stressful. A personal reason why I do not participate more often than I do, is that I feel very uncomfortable in the 'bridge club' environment. Below is a list of reasons why I do not feel comfortable;

1 - I am much younger than average of players locally and I feel that I do not fit in (note - this is personal feeling, it is likely not true but nonetheless is how i feel)

2 - When I do play, I play 75% of time w/my tournament partner. We have fairly intensive system, and we are frequently harassed when we alert bids.

NOW for the dilemma, after having briefly described the environment. I play the other day in club game with a friend (other than regular partner). And we had one round that absolute torture for me. My friend and I were discussing the failure to alert some bids @ previous table, when our current opponent gives unsolicited comment;

"We dont alert bids just to confuse people though"

I intrepreted this as an inuendo towards us and was very unhappy with this comment.

So now for the actual bridge hands. The first hand, my partner opened Flannery 2D (as I properly alerted), I bid 2H with my 3433 3 count and my LHO then goes into huddle. Reaches for a bid, puts it back, fumbles around in the bidding box and suddenly lightning strike and she find the bid she wanted all along, 3nt. My partner passes and my RHO without any thought at all, bids 4C. So the local 'fad' is that 4C is always Gerber, so I wasnt about to stand for them getting a free shot @ Gerber (he,he) so I bid 4H (white vs red - yes i know i am wrong) and my LHO bids 5C. So the hand that bid 3nt hits the table;

Qx
xx
AQJx
AKQJ10

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM, isnt this fishy. I was always taught that over 2 level bids 3nt was meant to play. Isnt that convenient that the other hand pull 3nt to 4C with 4234 w/just a king and jack. So my conclusion was that the fumbling in the bidding box, was unauthorized information however such as to not incite the local social elite I did not call the director (futhermore, they were -200 in 5C, so they get bad result anyway).

The 2nd hand, auction proceed 1D by my RHO, pass by me, 1H by LHO, 1N by partner (as unpassed hand - we play sandwich in all position, hence I alert). Now please take into account the comment our opponent said before play of this round start ("We dont alert bids just to confuse people though"). The opps then bid to only 3H. Anyways, to make a long story short, IF the lady had asked about the alert (during bidding or play) she could have used that information to make an extra trick or two (Ax spades in her hand opposite KJ10x and failed to finesse for useful discard). But the lady played the hand without a care in the world as to what the alert was.

This round was TORTURE and stressful, between the pre-play comment, the unethical action on 1st board and the poor play on 2nd board I was ready to go home. Now I understand, that its my responsibility NOT to let such things bother me, however it does and I am not afraid to voice my opinion. I believe our local 'teacher' is insufficient, and I think the teacher fail to teach players about ethics and other intangibles. THIS is the type of play and behavior that prevents younger players from playing and enjoying the game.

Any comments or similar experience others have had, would be nice )) thx in advance.

[pclayton]

Mike:

I've played in at least half of the clubs in the LA area, and I can tell you that all but 2 or 3 have traits you described. Ethical issues abound, but the directors are under great pressure to keep the regulars happy. They'd rather chastise an infrequent player than call on the carpet one of the nice couple that always sits 4 NS on Wed nights. Fortunately I live in an area where I can drive an extra 20 minutes and get to a club I do like, that has good players, and directors that don't put up with these shenanigans.

I have not had that experience in any form of tournament, even sectionals. The comment you heard from the person at the beginning of the round would at least get a ZT warning, and some directors actually have zero tolerance for 'zero tolerance'.

There is a no way a director with even a rudimentary knowledge of the rules would allow the 4♣ call.

If the clubs want to protect their turf and reward 1.6 blacks for a nights work, it doesn't change the world of bridge. What chaps me is that these clubs are particpating in STACS and ACBL wide games that frequently pay 15-20 MPs for when Mr. and Mrs. Fish have the random, once in a lifetime monster 75% game.

Most tournaments have a fair amount of younger players. At 41, I don't really feel like a kid anymore, but I'm way younger than the average.

[Fluffy]

Yzerman, on Jan 7 2005, 04:44 PM, said:

1 - I am much younger than average of players locally and I feel that I do not fit in (note - this is personal feeling, it is likely not true but nonetheless is how i feel)

I started to play at 13 and the youngest player I met in my city untill I was 18 that played had around 35, at the local club I used (and still do) to play average age was 60 or more (counting me), youngest probably my mother, who was director . But instead the enviroment there was so sweet and wonderfull.

[keylime]

Being the youngest member of my unit here on Vancouver Island at age 29, the first time the Mrs. and I went to the local sanction to play, we got asked if we were lost!

Using our system has not been without many testy exchanges when we settled into Nanaimo - I distinctly remember one exchange where the RHO though one of our openings wasn't "legitimate". This got a director call, where the TD, a very nice man comes over and ascertains that the opening is legal and to play on - my RHO wasn't happy with this and proceeded to take a call, only to go -1700 vul vs red because I so happen to hold values but not enough to try for slam.

This same person starts basically saying that we were using a system that shouldn't be allowed. We call again; TD comes and tries to keep the peace but our fearless RHO wasn't to be denied his grief - it took me, of all the people, new in town and country saying to him: "Sir, this is legal. If you would sit down and read the General Convention Chart, assuming that you even have the bridge acumen to digest it, you'll find that we can have all the conventional responses and rebids that we want over opening bids of 2 clubs and higher - so I suggest you play bridge instead of going for 1700 against us.". The TD winked at me with overwhelming approval.

As time has gone on, for the most part the club is used to our uniqueness. They also got to know us as people, realizing that our background in bridge is far different from the rubber bridge - English influenced - basic duplicate upbringing that many had. They also have learned that we're a lot more competent than they gave us credit for. Do we have bad games? From time to time; however we often are where we should be, near or at the top. If anything, we are acknowledged for our hand evaulation techniques and style - we are attack oriented and we guarantee some disparities in the scoring!

The tourney track though has been rather rewarding. Many good people have mentioned that they read my posts on here - the BC community of bridge players are rather versed in 'net items it seems and that's a plus for me. That, and my age - what an asset!

I have to admit that at our club, most of the TD's simply aren't as strict or as finite in their rulings. Hesistations are not that common for some reason; most everyone plays a similar style and it's a "I have my bid" mentality. However UI is a problem - many get stuck in some auctions and it causes a problem. With the new addition of a director this problem is trying to be addressed; only a positive.

All in all, the club experience here in Nanaimo is pleasant, enjoyable, and frankly light years AHEAD of Tampa and Oklahoma City. Tampa has a very nice turnout, but it was at times rather "cliquish" and I didn't feel comfortable towards the end of my time there; OKC had at the time very little turnout and we were looked upon being different as a hindrance to their game and masterpoint totals. It's almost as good as Huntsville; nothing will top that outstanding club's hospitality and warmth.

[the hog]

Mike, this will be no consolation to you I guess, but the actions you describe could just as easily have taken place here. Some bridge "players" are the same the world over.

[Chamaco]

Jlall, on Jan 7 2005, 05:42 PM, said:

What do I do? I let it slide. Perhaps this is wrong, but at the club level I just let them be unethical if they want to. They are social, mainly very elderly people, that do nothing but play at the club 7 days a week.

Justin,
I wish most if not all players were like you.

I have been playing lot of chess in the last 25 years, and everytime I had a chance to win by some "tricks" (e.g. winning just on time in a draw or lost position), I offered a draw.
My point is, social relation comes first, competitive results at 2nd place, and I applied the same phylosophy not only at club level, but at national level too.

Even when the rulings would defend your claims, not necessarily everything that is legal or allowed by the laws is nice.

It did cost me some points, but everybody knows me as a very nice player and person.

In the opposite case, I would be known as a tough player but, nice-behaving only when I win.

According to my priorities, my cost-benefit analysis is a big plus :-), and I am trying to apply the same in bridge, the same way you do: give up some points, gain popularity, what an investment! maybe one day you'll be elected as president ! ;-)

[TimG]

The actions you describe (and worse) could happen in most any bridge club in North America. What you have to always keep in mind is that for most players a night at the club is a social outing rather than a competitive outing.

Back, once upon a time, I played in a lot of club games, then I went through a stage where I played only once or twice a year in a club game. Now, I play once a week when I am not doing something else. I play mostly in non-regular partnerships and try to make an effort to ask a variety of people to play. A casual approach to the game makes the situations you describe less annoying.

In fact, the only recent "incidents" at the club that I can recall involved players who are regular tournament players. The actions of the club-only patrons seldom phase me in the least.

[whereagles]

Some people want bridge to be linear. No conventions, no cue-bids, no need to think too much. They just want to sit there, relaxed and without having to worry about unusual things.

This actually goes far beyond bridge: it is a reflection of the wave of neo-liberal conservatism that is sweeping the world, feeding on fear. Fear of change. The conservatives will try and make you think and act like them. What you experienced at table is just a symptom of a global problem.

There isn't much you can do about it, except standing up for what you believe and think it's right.

[bearmum]

Yzerman, on Jan 8 2005, 05:44 AM, said:

"When I do play, I play 75% of time w/my tournament partner. We have fairly intensive system, and we are frequently harassed when we alert bids."
In ANY club (no matter where) no director should (IMO) let players be harrassed for alerting bids which HAVE to be alerted

"We dont alert bids just to confuse people though"

This should be an automatic disqualification of player director (and reportable to ACBL) AND in my opinion why the ACBL should look at ALL clubs (who run club games where ACBL points are awarded) to make sure they are run according to the RULES of the ACBL - who in Regional ( Maybe State?) and CERTAINLY Nationals have a ZERO tolerance policy.
ANY club not willing to follow rules should NOT be allowed affiliation (AND that should apply to ALL countries)

I have the same problem here in Australia with SOME players seem to be allowed to get away with "unfair" but not "unethical" (a FINE line) behaviour but because MOST of the time I feel that directors at CLUB level are doing the best they can and MOST players at club games (ESPECIALLY those just out of 'learners' )are really NOT trying to "cheat" via hesitation etc that I tend to let it slide --- BUT I DO call director for call or lead out of term or failure to alert what SHOUD be alerted JUST because beginners need to learn there ARE penalties for those type of infractions

[Brandal]

whereagles, on Mar 21 2005, 09:55 AM, said:

Some people want bridge to be linear. No conventions, no cue-bids, no need to think too much. They just want to sit there, relaxed and without having to worry about unusual things.

This actually goes far beyond bridge: it is a reflection of the wave of neo-liberal conservatism that is sweeping the world, feeding on fear. Fear of change. The conservatives will try and make you think and act like them. What you experienced at table is just a symptom of a global problem.

There isn't much you can do about it, except standing up for what you believe and think it's right.

I'm not disagreeing with you or saying bridge should
be "linear" or different from what we see today.

BUT......there is also a "fine line" where some people
make the game of bridge less attractive to others by
excercising their rights without consideration,especially
at club level.

Say 5% play some competitive bridge at some level
outside the club evenings,that means 95% have a social
approach first,making a decent score or not being second.

Maybe I'm way off here,but I think the 5% should consider
their "effect" on how enjoyable they make an average
club event for the rest of the field.

[whereagles]

You are right, Brandal, that good players have a moral obligation to promote the game and provide a good atmosphere at table.

But that should not mean the good players must play as other people like. Instead, they should be able to play their gadgets while disclosing all information about them in a friendly way. Confronting not-so-good players with gadgets that are well explained helps demistifying the prejudices people have against artificial bids.

It is only through education that peoples' fears can be overcome. This is a general statement. It doesn't apply only to Bridge, but to life in general.

[Brandal]

whereagles, on Mar 22 2005, 08:46 AM, said:

You are right, Brandal, that good players have a moral obligation to promote the game and provide a good atmosphere at table.

But that should not mean the good players must play as other people like. Instead, they should be able to play their gadgets while disclosing all information about them in a friendly way. Confronting not-so-good players with gadgets that are well explained helps demistifying the prejudices people have against artificial bids.

It is only through education that peoples' fears can be overcome. This is a general statement. It doesn't apply only to Bridge, but to life in general.

I agree completely

[bearmum]

whereagles, on Mar 23 2005, 02:46 AM, said:

You are right, Brandal, that good players have a moral obligation to promote the game and provide a good atmosphere at table.

But that should not mean the good players must play as other people like. Instead, they should be able to play their gadgets while disclosing all information about them in a friendly way. Confronting not-so-good players with gadgets that are well explained helps demistifying the prejudices people have against artificial bids.

It is only through education that peoples' fears can be overcome. This is a general statement. It doesn't apply only to Bridge, but to life in general.

I agree

My reg P and I were playing in NACB in DC ------ in the 0-50 room ( where we were legally allowed to play cos we had only been living in US for almost 3 years - so FEW ACBL points)--- and one table opps said (with LITERALLY shaking hands) "This is our FIRST tournament outside club tourneys-- and we are beginners"

OK First round - one OPP opened out of turn !

We called director (cos IF u don't beginners may NOT realise there are penalties for opening out of turn [or other things])

Director came (AND was from OUR home club{SMALL world }) --- and explained ALL the possibilities-- 1st one was Icould accept the bid and all bids after were normal

So I did accept the bid -- even though I felt that we COULD have got a BIG plus score by not accepting it --- but I feel that as LONG time players I really didn't want to take advantage of a nervous beginner's mistake

BTW we got a good score ANYWAY and hopefully there are two more players who are still enjoying playing (probably at club level still)

[DrTodd13]

I don't go to the local club that much either but I don't put up with this UI nonsense. Probably the 3rd or 4th time I went to the local club, my LHO goes into a huddle at the two level on the second round of bidding and then finally passes. Then, this old geezer on my right makes a bid. I don't know if he has the hand for it or not so I call the director to protect my rights. Director comes over and everyone agrees to the hesitation. He looks at geezer's hand and disallows the bid. This sent geezer into a hissy fit. He went on-and-on about how he was a respected member of the club and had played there for 20+ years. I guess he should be happy because for that instant he more resembled a one-year old than a geezer.