- 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
#21
Dear Director / Re: Change of call
Last post by TonyRolfe - 30 July, 2024, 09:41 PMI was about to ask a similar question, so I will piggy-back onto this thread, if I may.
We had a similar situation at Mollymook, where I made a weak jump overall in spades, holding 6 nice hearts and 3 spades.
Law 25A2 talks allows change only due to mechanical error or slip of the tongue, neither of which seems to apply to written bidding. Therefore it appears that no change to a written bid can be allowed. I made no comment and the opponents made an impossible 3NT+3 when partner believed my bid and we never took our heart tricks.
I remember reading somewhere that the emphasis of the 2017 laws was to provide rectification rather than punishment and to endeavour to obtain a sensible bridge outcome.
Clearly, not allowing the change of an unintended call will seldom achieve a sensible bridge result.
I believe that the best way to achieve a sensible bridge result would be to allow any change of an unintended written call and make the original call UI to offender's partner. (Thus stopping any "This is the suit I want you to lead, but this is the suit I have" shenanigans.
Why force a pair to play 4S in a 2-1 fit rather than 4H in a 5-4 fit?
We had a similar situation at Mollymook, where I made a weak jump overall in spades, holding 6 nice hearts and 3 spades.
Law 25A2 talks allows change only due to mechanical error or slip of the tongue, neither of which seems to apply to written bidding. Therefore it appears that no change to a written bid can be allowed. I made no comment and the opponents made an impossible 3NT+3 when partner believed my bid and we never took our heart tricks.
I remember reading somewhere that the emphasis of the 2017 laws was to provide rectification rather than punishment and to endeavour to obtain a sensible bridge outcome.
Clearly, not allowing the change of an unintended call will seldom achieve a sensible bridge result.
I believe that the best way to achieve a sensible bridge result would be to allow any change of an unintended written call and make the original call UI to offender's partner. (Thus stopping any "This is the suit I want you to lead, but this is the suit I have" shenanigans.
Why force a pair to play 4S in a 2-1 fit rather than 4H in a 5-4 fit?
#22
Dear Director / Re: Change of call
Last post by Nick Hughes - 28 July, 2024, 03:17 PMI'm guessing written bidding, with North writing "4H" instead of the intended "4S".
It's likely that North's brain was muddled by thinking "hearts = transfer".
If so, this was an Unintended Call (25A). A player may change an unintended call until his partner has made a call. East's fast pass doesn't take away that right.
In my view, we are becoming too lenient in allowing changes of written bids. I am wary of any claim of a disconnect between brain and hand. (Sometimes declarers "trump" with a card in a suit that isn't trumps. No recourse.)
Having said that, the dominant view is that North is allowed to claim this as a slip of the brain.
In this case, South would be there to save the day anyway.
It's likely that North's brain was muddled by thinking "hearts = transfer".
If so, this was an Unintended Call (25A). A player may change an unintended call until his partner has made a call. East's fast pass doesn't take away that right.
In my view, we are becoming too lenient in allowing changes of written bids. I am wary of any claim of a disconnect between brain and hand. (Sometimes declarers "trump" with a card in a suit that isn't trumps. No recourse.)
Having said that, the dominant view is that North is allowed to claim this as a slip of the brain.
In this case, South would be there to save the day anyway.
#23
Dear Director / Change of call
Last post by unj - 11 July, 2024, 01:15 PMN opened 1NT, E Pass, S 2H, N alerted, play transfers, W Pass, N 4H, E with the speed of light Pass. N corrected his bid to 4S. E called the Director. Ruling please
#24
Dear Director / Re: Damage from Misbid( deviat...
Last post by Matthew McManus - 06 June, 2024, 08:54 AMOn the evidence presented, there does not appear to have been any infraction. 2D was simply a mistaken bid. There was nothing that required alerting by East or West. West has not taken any suspicious action which may have allowed for East having forgotten the system or made a misbid. Unless the director is able to identify some infraction, there are no grounds for awarding an adjusted score.
#25
General Discussion / balance in pivot mitchells
Last post by Jan Howell - 04 June, 2024, 12:02 PMWhat is the opinion of directors about the balance in an 8 table pivot mitchell?
There are 7 comparisons for each pair on each board set, making a total of 63, so would it be reasonable to assume that about 4 comparisons with each other pair would demonstrate a very good balance?
So if a movement provides none, or 1 or 2 comparisons for some pairs with other pairs and in the higher numbers, 7 or 8 comparisons with other pairs would this suggest that it is a poorly balanced movement?
There are 7 comparisons for each pair on each board set, making a total of 63, so would it be reasonable to assume that about 4 comparisons with each other pair would demonstrate a very good balance?
So if a movement provides none, or 1 or 2 comparisons for some pairs with other pairs and in the higher numbers, 7 or 8 comparisons with other pairs would this suggest that it is a poorly balanced movement?
#26
Dear Director / Damage from Misbid( deviation ...
Last post by Mike Trafalski - 18 May, 2024, 08:00 PMBidding
S W N E
1C P 1NT 2D
3NT P P P
Declarer plays 3NT making 6 tricks.
On the play of AKQXX by E (partner has JXXX). At the end of the hand Dec calls Director.
East states that over a 1NT opening bid , 2D shows 8-13 HCP and a 5 card major. Director awards NS an adjusted score of5C making 11 Tricks.
E explain he missed the 1C opening bid by S.
How do you
S W N E
1C P 1NT 2D
3NT P P P
Declarer plays 3NT making 6 tricks.
On the play of AKQXX by E (partner has JXXX). At the end of the hand Dec calls Director.
East states that over a 1NT opening bid , 2D shows 8-13 HCP and a 5 card major. Director awards NS an adjusted score of5C making 11 Tricks.
E explain he missed the 1C opening bid by S.
How do you
#27
General Discussion / Re: Determining an Adjusted Sc...
Last post by Matthew McManus - 13 May, 2024, 12:19 PMThe Director needs to identify how the play has proceeded up to the revoke trick. They then need to make a judgement as to how the remainder of play would have gone had there been no revoke. This means that every case needs to be determined on its merits. It is not something that the director has to determine at the table. It would be appropriate for the director to instruct the players to enter the score as it would be with the normal revoke penalties applied and to tell them that the hand will be considered to see whether the non-offenders could have done better.
The director should take their time in making a decision about the likely outcome and should not be afraid to consult with more advanced players if they feel their bridge abilities are not up to analysing a particularly complex situation.
Once a decision has been made, this needs to be communicated to the players and, if necessary, the recorded score corrected.
The director should take their time in making a decision about the likely outcome and should not be afraid to consult with more advanced players if they feel their bridge abilities are not up to analysing a particularly complex situation.
Once a decision has been made, this needs to be communicated to the players and, if necessary, the recorded score corrected.
#28
General Discussion / Bridgemates retaining session ...
Last post by Rick Nehmy - 11 May, 2024, 10:08 AMOur Bridgemates are sometimes retaining session data after the fat lady has sung! We are using Compscore 3 and after a session is over and the OK button is pressed we get asked for session and table information, rather than a "Not Activated" message. We would be grateful for any thoughts.
#29
General Discussion / ABDA Website
Last post by Gary Wilson - 09 May, 2024, 10:59 AMThe ABDA website has been relocated from the events section of the ABF website to our new domain at abda.au which incorporates this upgraded forum.
Visit the ABDA website at https://abda.au/.
Visit the ABDA website at https://abda.au/.
#30
General Discussion / Determining an Adjusted Score
Last post by gail.hamer - 07 May, 2024, 09:16 PMA recent situation arose where a revoke by a defender, which was only identified late in play of the board, resulted in declarer's intended line of play being interrupted. This consequently meant that the 3NT was defeated, even with the transfer of one trick for the revoke. Declarer asked that an adjusted score be considered.
The six other pairs had made the 3NT contract, with results ranging from 12 to 8 tricks (for our disadvantaged pair). Are there written guidelines on how adjusted scores should be determined, or does the director award a "mid-range" result if adjustment is warranted?
The six other pairs had made the 3NT contract, with results ranging from 12 to 8 tricks (for our disadvantaged pair). Are there written guidelines on how adjusted scores should be determined, or does the director award a "mid-range" result if adjustment is warranted?