BBO Discussion Forums: a competitve decision - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

a competitve decision experts vote needed

#21 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2004-June-01, 15:53

JRG, on Jun 1 2004, 03:47 PM, said:

whereagles, on May 25 2004, 12:37 PM, said:

The Director's decision was his own judgement of the situation. You can't say it was "right" or "wrong". In fact, I might very well rule as he did unless Flame convinced me he would definitely bid over a non-forcing 3 and pass a forcing 3.

And of course, if you disagree with the Director's judgement, you appeal. That's what appeals comittees are for :)

The burden of proof is NOT supposed to be laid on the non-offending side. If you are not sure, you are supposed to rule against the OFFENDING side.

There appear to be differing codes applied by TDs depending on which side of the Atlantic. In USA the TD seems to act as nothing more than an automaton to determine who is the offending side, rule against that side, schedule it for the inevitable appeal and move on to the next problem. In UK it seems that the TD should do his best to predict the result of the AC and make that ruling in advance. Yes, if in genuine doubt the non-offending side would be protected, but every attempt would be made to allay or limit those doubts, and if the balance of doubt was substantially in favour of the offending side then rule in that favour.

This issue was discussed in some depth at

http://forums.bridge...p?showtopic=535
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#22 User is offline   Flame 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,085
  • Joined: 2004-March-26
  • Location:Israel

Posted 2004-June-01, 16:31

Hi JRG Im glad we agree on the specific subject of late bidding, yes if you think the first bid is a disaster then you might fix it with a second one, but i didnt think my bid was a disaster and i was ready to claim what i worked for. my pass was a premptive bid, its main perpose was to mislead them into not getting to the right contract (which i suspected have 80% to be 5D, 19% to be 6D, and 1% to 4D) now when they got to 4D i sure dont want to ruin all the good work of my i did so far by bidding 4sp now.
About believing your partner or the opponents i agree on the principle, but i dont think i didnt believe my partner here, i believe she had her overcall (which is about 8 hcp the way we play) its about who will the information about my spade support help more my partner or the opponent and i decided that in this specific place it will help the opponents more.
Thanks for all the replays it been a good thread.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users