[pigpenz]

auction:
2♦ pass 2nt pass
3♥ pass 4♥ out

3♥ alerted as weak two in hearts.

partner makes opening lead
you call TD cause convention not legal for this event.
TD comes to table you msg then sit there for 8 minutes
waiting for opp to play to next trick. Keep messaging TD
but no response till 1 minute in round left. TD has made a
ruling but had not told table

Ruling:
AVG/AVG
with warning to offending side they can not do this again

My concerns:
1. Lack of handling this situation by TD, time wise and not informing
players at table to ruling.
2.why an avg/avg ruling
all of which leads me to believe that when 1 TD is running a 50 plus table game
there is too much for them to do to handle this large of a game.

And why was offending side given an AVG? Should it be
avg/avg
avg-/avg
avg-/avg+

TD at end of next round finally said there were too many options on the defense to award a contract of 4♥ -1 so said avg was fair for us

[hrothgar]

Comment 1: I've never been completely content with the way these sorts of adjustments normally occur. This board is unplayable. The "result" should not factor into the results for either pair. I would very much prefer this option to allocating an "average" or average +.

Comment 2: The offending side should get hit with a proceedural penalty for playing an illegal convention. "Officially" play stops when a director is called, so its hard to fault the offending side for not playing.

[inquiry]

1) Since the TD sat there for 8 minutes while you waited, then you where not able to finish the board and you were a non-offending side. According to normal rules of bridge you are entitled to average plus (or your average result for the session, which ever is greater). On BBO you are limited to average plus however.

2) The bbo td, however, doesn;t have to follow the normal rules (unless ACBL or a tourney which announced to follow acbl or wbf rules).

3) My feeling is that before ruling direct damage, the director has to evaluate rather the use of the banned convention itself caused damage. That is, in your case if the bidding had been 2♥-4♥ or similiar were you disadvantage by the slow approach taken here. If you could, for example doubled 2♥ for takeout and found good sac, or you could have doubled 2♦ if you knew that wasn't ♦ and found a good sac (or game), then yes, damage had occured. My feeling here is that in all likelyhood i would have ruled no damage and ordered play to continue. In the mean while, i would sternly warn the offenders future use will get them banned from my events. When procedural penalties are inacted, then that will be the punishment for such bids when play continues.

[MickyB]

I disagree on your 3rd point, Ben. The auction couldn't start with a 2♥ opening because 2♥ meant something else for this pair.

I think the normal ruling in the first instance is to give Av+/Av- unless the table result was more favourable for the NOS.

[inquiry]

MickyB, on Apr 10 2006, 10:14 PM, said:

I disagree on your 3rd point, Ben. The auction couldn't start with a 2♥ opening because 2♥ meant something else for this pair.

I think the normal ruling in the first instance is to give Av+/Av- unless the table result was more favourable for the NOS.

The problem is not how the auction went at this table, as that is not "legal" by definition. The question is how can you restore equity. The answer maybe you can not, but most players actually want to play. This is true of both sides. If this is a routine 4♥ where the field plays in 4♥ AND where the non-offending side was not directly harmed by the lack of ability to deal with the illegal convention, then the play should continue. There are LOTS of ways they could ahve been damaged of course, this assumes the director rules they were not.

Now, if there was a way to give a procedural penalty, I would. The director didn't let them play, so it should be average + of pig, I can't imagine more than average - for the offending side here, btw if an awarded result is given. And if there was anyway were clues from the bidding (or lack of bidding - say dbl of 2♦) could possibly lead to down one in 4♥, that is might be what I would rule.

[pigpenz]

the real jest of the problem is that the director was called with 9 minutes left in the round before i had made final pass. TD came to the table was notified and there was no chat by the TD in the channel as to what or if any ruling. Meanwhile my K♦ held trick one and waited for 8 minutes for my left hand opp the declarer to follow, but they couldnt cause Td had already give both of us avg for the board. so we kept msg the Td but they didnt show up to the table till there was one minute left in the round.

My main objection was the lack of the TD handling this properly in a timely manor and possibly their arrogance when I objected to the fact that the offending side was given an avg for their offense. I can live with my avg for the hand, but felt that avg+/avg- would be proper ruling, but giving the offending side avg was way out of line.

Even contacted Gweny who is in charge of ACBL tourney on BBO while dummy during the next round and she basically said that it was my fault for calling the TD to inform them of an illegal convention so since play can no longer continue TD has to make a ruling and in this case avg to both pairs. So basically she is saying we should defend hand out and call TD at end of the hand...this doesnt quite seem right to me

[sfbp]

When you give average anything, play ceases and the hand is over. If not the last board then bidding next board begins. Round is over if it was the last board of the round.

I have seen players sitting there complaining for 10 mins because NOTHING HAPPENED (remember "Adventure"?) when they clicked... they just weren't looking where it said "Round Complete" (in the "clock").

It sounds like this might have been the case?

Stephen

[paulg]

The English Bridge Union publishes a Tournament Directors Guide, known as the White Book, that contains guidance based on the 1997 Laws for a variety of situations.

Although it is for EBU tournaments, it does provide good advice for all.

In this instance:

Quote

40.3 Illegal conventions
If a pair use an illegal convention the board is scored as in #90.4.2. No attempt is made to find other instances of use of the illegal convention.

If a pair deliberately use a convention knowing it to be illegal this is considered very serious, and disqualification may be considered.

Suppose a pair use an illegal convention and do not describe it properly, and get a score of at least 40% on a board. The TD should consider the two infractions, namely misinformation and using an illegal convention. If he would adjust because of misinformation to a score that gives the non-offending side greater than 60% he should do so: otherwise he gives them A+ per #90.4.2.

90.4.2 Illegal method, fielding of psyche, deviation or misbid
If a contestant uses a method that is not permitted, or is adjudged to have fielded a psyche, deviation or misbid then the deal should be completed. If he attains a score of A– or less then the score stands. Otherwise he gets A– and his opponents get A+.

I think this is very clear and excellent guidance.

Paul

[FrancesHinden]

I have no problems with this guidance.

It's worth noting it's one of the very few times (at least under English rules) when the NOS get a free double shot. If you opponents play an illegal convention, it's in your interests to play the board out first and then call the TD. You are ensured at worst Ave+ on the board, no matter how wild, gambling or irrational your actions.

[pigpenz]

sfbp, on Apr 11 2006, 01:23 AM, said:

When you give average anything, play ceases and the hand is over. If not the last board then bidding next board begins. Round is over if it was the last board of the round.

I have seen players sitting there complaining for 10 mins because NOTHING HAPPENED (remember "Adventure"?) when they clicked... they just weren't looking where it said "Round Complete" (in the "clock").

It sounds like this might have been the case?

Stephen

yes steve, i believe that is what happened.
It would have been nice to know that the TD had made a ruling.
I did try to msg the TD about three times as time went away and there was no response.....even my opp finally said I cant play I am stuck.

One of the things the ACBL TD's are very good at is running their introductory message at the beginning of the tourney that no MULTI or Wilkosz are allowed only GCC can be played.

[blackshoe]

inquiry, on Apr 10 2006, 09:42 PM, said:

The bbo td, however, doesn;t have to follow the normal rules (unless ACBL or a tourney which announced to follow acbl or wbf rules).

I'm new here. Do you mean to say that on BBO, a TD can ignore the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge?

[DrTodd13]

blackshoe, on Apr 17 2006, 01:12 PM, said:

inquiry, on Apr 10 2006, 09:42 PM, said:

The bbo td, however, doesn;t have to follow the normal rules (unless ACBL or a tourney which announced to follow acbl or wbf rules).

I'm new here. Do you mean to say that on BBO, a TD can ignore the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge?

They do it all the time...most of the time through ignorance.

[pigpenz]

DrTodd13, on Apr 17 2006, 04:24 PM, said:

They do it all the time...most of the time through ignorance.

and some times they give rulings through ignorance which then eventually in tyring to correct it carries over to arrogance

[luke warm]

blackshoe, on Apr 17 2006, 04:12 PM, said:

inquiry, on Apr 10 2006, 09:42 PM, said:

The bbo td, however, doesn;t have to follow the normal rules (unless ACBL or a tourney which announced to follow acbl or wbf rules).

I'm new here. Do you mean to say that on BBO, a TD can ignore the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge?

welcome to the forums and don't let the actions of some TDs color your enjoyment of the site... as todd says, usually it's thru ignorance tho sometimes they just flat don't care

[glen]

Straightforward case.

a ) A+/A-.
b ) Notify table of ruling immediately.
c ) Warn offending pair to read rules provided at start of ACBL tourney.

Not doing this was poor work by the TD, and I'm sorry nobody can say sorry for this.

By contrast, my wife and I were at the Toronto regional this long weekend, and there was such an excellent set of TDs there - great TDs certainly add a lot to the enjoyment of tournament play, whether online or live.

[LH2650]

A straightforward case, yet we all differ on the ruling. Mine is Average Plus to both sides.

Let me digress to the Las Vegas Regional of a few years ago. My teammates opened 1 club (Precision). This was greeted with a 1 spade overcall, an Alert, and an explanation that it could be anything - they always bid 1 spade over a forcing club! The TD instructed that play should continue while he went in search of advice. The eventual ruling was that the convention, being purely destructive, was illegal, but that the score stood and there was no penalty.

This had me puzzled for some time, but it is actually very simple and straightforward. Law 12 requires damage in order for there to be a score adjustment (so the White Book process is illegal), and none had occurred. A normal contract and result had been achieved.

So, the TD in the Multi case made an error by not instructing that play should continue, and Law 82C requires him to correct that by giving Average Plus to both sides.

[FrancesHinden]

LH2650, on Apr 18 2006, 03:05 PM, said:

This had me puzzled for some time, but it is actually very simple and straightforward. Law 12 requires damage in order for there to be a score adjustment (so the White Book process is illegal),

What's Law 12 got to do with this?
The White Book process is entirely legal.

The ban on the multi (in the case specified here) is legal under Law 40D.

However, this Law does not specify the penalty for a breach (in common with many other laws). Ideally, whenever a sponsoring organisation introduces additional regulations they should also specify the penalties, if any, for breaking them.

It's the fact that the multi was banned in this tournament but that the penalty for playing it was not specified which has led to the disagreement over the correct ruling.

[awm]

I've had a running discussion with various people on the ACBL board about this for quite some time. As things stand now:

(1) There is no penalty for playing illegal methods. If there is a clear case of damage on the board because of the illegal methods then the score will be adjusted (usually to avg+/avg-).

(2) If a pair is caught playing illegal methods, then they will be warned by the director to stop playing such methods. If a pair is playing illegal methods and knows them to be illegal then there may be more severe penalties; however accusing a pair of doing this is an accusation of cheating and therefore a zero-tolerance violation against the accusing side.

Personally I think the EBU rule (where playing illegal methods you cannot get better than average-minus) seems more sensible to me. Isn't it our obligation, as players who use nonstandard methods, to make sure these are okay with the regulations?

[pigpenz]

awm, on Apr 18 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

I've had a running discussion with various people on the ACBL board about this for quite some time. As things stand now:

(1) There is no penalty for playing illegal methods. If there is a clear case of damage on the board because of the illegal methods then the score will be adjusted (usually to avg+/avg-).

(2) If a pair is caught playing illegal methods, then they will be warned by the director to stop playing such methods. If a pair is playing illegal methods and knows them to be illegal then there may be more severe penalties; however accusing a pair of doing this is an accusation of cheating and therefore a zero-tolerance violation against the accusing side.

Personally I think the EBU rule (where playing illegal methods you cannot get better than average-minus) seems more sensible to me. Isn't it our obligation, as players who use nonstandard methods, to make sure these are okay with the regulations?

I remember playing at Bridge Week in Pasadena 83' where we used to play 2♠ as 5-5 in minors 5-10 hcp....opps got to 3♠ doubled which was going down quite a bit...opps called TD Roger Harbin the TD threw out the board gave them avg+ us avg-. Now the opps did something really stupid and bid cause they thought they were geting robbed, so sort of seemed like a two way shot for them.

[LH2650]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 18 2006, 11:34 AM, said:

What's Law 12 got to do with this?

The White Book regulations concerning the use of an illegal convention edict score adjustments, and these can be made only under Law 12. The regulations do not conform to Law 12, so score adjustments made by using them can be illegal.