- Welcome to Aust. Bridge Directors Ass..
News:
January 2024
The ABDA has relaunched this forum with upgraded software, appearance and features. All the old content remains. Users should log in and update their membership profile.
Only financial members of the ABDA can register to be part of this forum. Non-members can browse the open sections of the forum and post questions to "Ask a Director" and "Online Directing" without registration.
Recent posts
#1
Dear Director / Re: reviewing bids
Last post by Matthew McManus - 11 October, 2024, 04:38 PMThat is correct. Asking about a single bid is very poor practice and WILL lead to unauthorised information. This may constrain the actions your partner takes during the play.
#2
Dear Director / reviewing bids
Last post by Fred Heywood - 01 October, 2024, 12:02 PMAfter the auction is complete, and a lead has not been made, can anyone ask about a particular bid. I was told you had to review all bids, not any one bid, as it may be unauthorized information?
#3
Dear Director / Re: Dummy not presented correc...
Last post by niftyneville - 13 September, 2024, 10:26 AMThe responsibility for the correct presentation of Dummy's cards rests with Declarer. See Law 41D
Dummy's Hand
After the opening lead is faced, dummy spreads his hand in front of him on the table, face up, sorted into suits, the cards in order of rank with lowest ranking cards towards declarer, and in separate columns pointing lengthwise towards declarer. Trumps are placed to dummy's right. Declarer plays both his hand and that of dummy.
Failure to do this correctly is an infraction for which Declarer is responsible. It is a fallacy to suggest that defenders have any responsibility for the placement of dummy's cards.
The defender should be allowed to change his/her play.
Dummy's Hand
After the opening lead is faced, dummy spreads his hand in front of him on the table, face up, sorted into suits, the cards in order of rank with lowest ranking cards towards declarer, and in separate columns pointing lengthwise towards declarer. Trumps are placed to dummy's right. Declarer plays both his hand and that of dummy.
Failure to do this correctly is an infraction for which Declarer is responsible. It is a fallacy to suggest that defenders have any responsibility for the placement of dummy's cards.
The defender should be allowed to change his/her play.
#4
Dear Director / Re: Should change of call be a...
Last post by Gidi - 13 September, 2024, 09:43 AMHi Sue
As director, I will decide according to how I read the bid.
As director, I will decide according to how I read the bid.
#5
Dear Director / Dummy not presented correctly
Last post by David Burn - 12 September, 2024, 04:29 PMHad a situation where Dummy was laid out with what looked like 2 Diamonds to the 10, and 5 Hearts to the Ace. Defender lead the JD to the second trick and Declarer followed, only to suddenly discover the Ace was actually a Diamond and not a Heart. It was relocated to the head of the Diamonds, but now the Defender wanted to change their play (partner hadn't played at that stage) saying she would not have lead the JD if the AD was in the correct position.
Even though it is really up to Dummy to make sure the cards are presented in the correct manner, I believe there is some responsibility on all players to assess all aspects of the cards, including cards in the wrong suits, only 12 cards showing because one is hidden under another, etc, etc. On that basis, and the fact that it was exposed to partner, I required the JD to be played. Is that correct / reasonable, or should I be more sympathetic and allow the player to change their lead card.
Even though it is really up to Dummy to make sure the cards are presented in the correct manner, I believe there is some responsibility on all players to assess all aspects of the cards, including cards in the wrong suits, only 12 cards showing because one is hidden under another, etc, etc. On that basis, and the fact that it was exposed to partner, I required the JD to be played. Is that correct / reasonable, or should I be more sympathetic and allow the player to change their lead card.
#6
General Discussion / Re: Bridgemates retaining sess...
Last post by Gary Wilson - 06 September, 2024, 02:53 PMHi Rick
That is normal. As Bridgemates are handed in, make sure they have all gone to End of Session. Then click OK once more until you see the opening screen for a new session. That will turn off automatically. When the last bridgemate has End of Session closed, the Bridgemate Control Software will close automatically. Then everything is fine to start a new session.
That is normal. As Bridgemates are handed in, make sure they have all gone to End of Session. Then click OK once more until you see the opening screen for a new session. That will turn off automatically. When the last bridgemate has End of Session closed, the Bridgemate Control Software will close automatically. Then everything is fine to start a new session.
#7
Dear Director / Re: Should change of call be a...
Last post by SusieQ - 05 September, 2024, 04:21 PMHi Gigi,
I wasn't thinking that law 25 applies. The bid was definitely intended but that player asked to change their bid after realising their own mistake because they had misread partner's poor writing. Perhaps Law 21A applies and it would be good to have this confirmed.
Regards
Sue
I wasn't thinking that law 25 applies. The bid was definitely intended but that player asked to change their bid after realising their own mistake because they had misread partner's poor writing. Perhaps Law 21A applies and it would be good to have this confirmed.
Regards
Sue
#8
Dear Director / Re: Should change of call be a...
Last post by Gidi - 04 September, 2024, 10:47 AMHi Sue
It has to be your decision on the day.
Law 25A2 says that a change is allowed if the unintended bid was "because of a mechanical error or a slip of the tongue". This presumably refers to oral bidding and bidding boxes respectively.
A change is not allowed if the call is because of "loss of concentration".
So as director, you need to determine if it was because of loss of concentration. How do you do that? Ask the player (away from the table), but unless they say explicitly "I lost concentration", it's up to you to decide. In our club we educate the players not to say "I lost concentration" if they want to change an unintended call.
What if it was because of misreading the bid, or another reason? The Law is silent about it.
But other than the Law, I believe that we need to think about the consequences. Would the game / session be better if you disallow the change and force NS to play in a stupid contract? Is it fair that NS get a bottom board, even if North was in a dream world for a split second? Is it fair to the other EW pairs that the EW on this table get a top because North was distracted? I think that the answers to all these questions is NO. for this reason, unless the player admits to losing concentration, I would tend to allow a change. In my opinion, this would maintain the integrity of the session.
It has to be your decision on the day.
Law 25A2 says that a change is allowed if the unintended bid was "because of a mechanical error or a slip of the tongue". This presumably refers to oral bidding and bidding boxes respectively.
A change is not allowed if the call is because of "loss of concentration".
So as director, you need to determine if it was because of loss of concentration. How do you do that? Ask the player (away from the table), but unless they say explicitly "I lost concentration", it's up to you to decide. In our club we educate the players not to say "I lost concentration" if they want to change an unintended call.
What if it was because of misreading the bid, or another reason? The Law is silent about it.
But other than the Law, I believe that we need to think about the consequences. Would the game / session be better if you disallow the change and force NS to play in a stupid contract? Is it fair that NS get a bottom board, even if North was in a dream world for a split second? Is it fair to the other EW pairs that the EW on this table get a top because North was distracted? I think that the answers to all these questions is NO. for this reason, unless the player admits to losing concentration, I would tend to allow a change. In my opinion, this would maintain the integrity of the session.
#9
Dear Director / Should change of call be allow...
Last post by Sue - 03 September, 2024, 09:41 AMOnly one pair is bidding. 1S, 3S, 4C, pass. The player who passed then called the director when they suddenly realised the bid was actually 4C and not 4S. One of the opponents commented that they thought the bid looked like 4S. There was no comment that unauthorised info was given by their partner eg facial expressions etc. Apparently the C was not clearly written. The director allowed the player to change their call - 4S.
How would you rule?
Thank you.
How would you rule?
Thank you.
#10
General Discussion / Which movement is better for b...
Last post by Brian Wade - 30 August, 2024, 01:06 PMAssuming a director has the choice of either a 7T Howell or a 7T Mitchell (arrow-switched) movement, which is the better movement from a balanced perspective?