[Jinksy]

mycroft, on 2014-October-03, 14:29, said:

That's why you circumvent the game playing with no kowtow, no stand up to it, just a quiet "Director, please" and an innocent "She's disputing my claim. This was my statement" - and she can play the game with the TD.

...

Have I mentioned I'm passive-aggressive recently?

I will try to keep this in mind and consciously use the strategy. It still sounds a little artificial to me - I don't honestly think I'm quick-witted enough to always realise that I'm getting into a dispute before I've got into one.

Also, this feels like it's dodged the point slightly. Suppose you think that someone's being belligerent about a point that isn't laws or ethics - or that simply in the manner they used to make their legal/ethical claim, they already went seriously overboard. Again, you'd like to tell them as much with some legal force behind you, rather than having to resort to sitting there and sucking it up then perhaps reporting it to a TD later.

Thinking about it, what if it happens the other way around? If someone is clearly violating the laws (e.g. the defence talking to each other, a dummy telling declarer how to play the hand, both of which I've seen repeatedly), what's the advice then? Typically I'll tell them to stop in my best effort at being both polite firm (which probably doesn't come across that way, since I don't have any natural authority), and typically they'll get defensive and unpleasant (especially since the people who do such stuff have often been aggressive beforehand).

What's the advice in such situations? Neither calling a TD either immediately and with no warning or giving a warning then calling one after the inevitable defensiveness are likely to keep things amicable - and here again, if they do step over the line in the meantime, I'd like to be able to call them out on it.

[jeffford76]

I find that you have to make a snap judgment pretty quickly after a disputed claim. Someone who just doesn't see the claim gets a more detailed explanation from me (but not playing it out). Someone being obstinate gets a "Let's just have the director sort it out."

Once the director is called, if the opponent attempts to further engage, the best thing to say is "I think we should wait until the director gets here."

[Vampyr]

Jinksy, on 2014-October-02, 18:18, said:

Sheesh, what options are there for complaining about directors?

Well, for a club game, speaking to the club manager or committee would be best, for a county event the county committee, and for a national event, the national chief TD. Although here he is sometimes the first choice for all events, because he is generally perceived to be more effective than any committee.

[mycroft]

Jinksy, on 2014-October-03, 14:11, said:

I still find myself at a loss as to what I'd say - or rather have said - if I called the director. Suppose you'd been in the OP situation. The woman involved hasn't sworn or insulted you, or done any such thing that would fit into an easy tick box of 'non-best behaviour', but as a sentient human she's left you feeling extremely put out. You call the director. He arrives at your table (let's pretend he teleports there instantly, so we don't have to hypothesise what would happen in the interim as a result of you doing so*), and the woman at least partially settles down as self-preservation kicks in in the presence of someone who can figuratively harm her. You have no evidence of how she was behaving, nor even any specific claims you can make about e.g. phrases she used, items she threw. Naturally she'll deny any nebulous claims of being aggressive.

What do you say to the TD?

"I did this, and she did this, and this happened." No judgement, no interpretation, just the facts, ma'am. You're not a lawyer arguing your case to a judge on contingency, and eating tonight depends on you winning; you're making the referee aware of what's going on in her game, which may (or may not!) be an infraction, or even actions unwanted by her. Once the TD is aware, the ball's in her court to deal with, and if it's not dealt with to your satisfaction, it's an issue between you and the TD, not you and the other player; at worst, you don't come back because it's a dealbreaker for you and this game doesn't seem to mind it.

Quote

* Separately, let's not assume this and look at it separately, since this is a very human part of bridge that the laws as I've heard them seem to ignore. Let's say the TD is taking a while to get there. What do you do to fill the time? Do you try to inform the woman that you're about to report her for bad behaviour? If so, do you attempt to describe why? Or do you refuse to talk to her until the TD arrives? Or do you have some other conversational strategy to pass the time?

(if these questions sound rhetorical, btw, they're not supposed to be! I would love a good one-size-fits-all approach here)

"Let's just see what the TD has to say, please." I don't recommend going from zero to stand-on-chair "DIE-REC-TOR!"; but after "please don't do that", or in this case, "statement" and then "clarification", and then "let's let the director handle this", further discussion can certainly consist of "I'm sure the director will clear all this up."

Yes, I can keep that up all day. With these people, engagement at any level is a net win for them and a net loss for you (if for no other reason than you get upset and "extremely put out"); so don't engage either with the argument or your emotions, just call the TD and explain. Make sure you call the TD before you get upset, and it's much easier to keep up the calm while you wait.

Quote

Thinking about it, what if it happens the other way around? If someone is clearly violating the laws (e.g. the defence talking to each other, a dummy telling declarer how to play the hand, both of which I've seen repeatedly), what's the advice then? Typically I'll tell them to stop in my best effort at being both polite firm (which probably doesn't come across that way, since I don't have any natural authority), and typically they'll get defensive and unpleasant (especially since the people who do such stuff have often been aggressive beforehand).

What's the advice in such situations? Neither calling a TD either immediately and with no warning or giving a warning then calling one after the inevitable defensiveness are likely to keep things amicable - and here again, if they do step over the line in the meantime, I'd like to be able to call them out on it.

I like your "typical"; if they get defensive, then they knew they were in the wrong, and will probably stop; if they get unpleasant, call the TD and let her do the education. Again, "just the facts" - "Declarer played a heart and dummy pulled the low (or high) one out right away. I asked them not to do that, and they asked me "what's the problem?" So I thought I'd ask you if there is a problem with doing that".

This may not make things amicable - but sitting and taking it, or letting them get away with this stuff in the future, doesn't make things amicable either, just now you're upset rather than them. There's no way to make everybody happy; and they win if you let them get away with it and you are now unhappy. I know, you don't want to "win" this (at least I hope you don't), you just want the issue to not repeat; the most effective way of doing that is bringing in the TD before the emotions get triggered, and let the TD take the lack of amiability.

It takes practise to disengage the autorespond loop that we all have enough to realize that calling the TD is an alternative to engaging; and in this , as in most of bridge, "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement."

[Trinidad]

Jinksy, on 2014-October-03, 14:42, said:

What's the advice in such situations? Neither calling a TD either immediately and with no warning or giving a warning then calling one after the inevitable defensiveness are likely to keep things amicable - and here again, if they do step over the line in the meantime, I'd like to be able to call them out on it.

So far, you have been experimenting with engaging in discussions with these kind of opponents. The results of your experiments were frustration on your part.

I think it is time to experiment with calling the TD, the way Mycroft described. After a couple of experiments you can evaluate the results. What do you have to lose?

Rik

[Jinksy]

I'll try to do it next time it comes up, and report the results here if I remember