Bridge Base Online

MINUTES

Saturday, February 28, 2004

Moderator: Gweny

Attendees:

Aacol, Adipus, Aisha759, And_Y, Anidiot, Aramesh_, Baa-Lamb, Bb116, Bilmanager, Borko, Bubuto, Calabres, Cg, Com!U66n, Culbbaran, Ege123, Ehhh, Esperanza, Farecik, Ferrerro, Francis236, Frosty, Geofspa, Gregg1012, Gweny, Hope, Hotshot, Jhahs, Johnna, Jojo8, Jw_Nl, Kornik3_, Kumi, Lathans, Lindab, Markmuzza, MCSD, Mink, Mirjam_3, Miss Blue, Mozersani, Mr1303, Natanya, Olmet, Paisano, Peefco, Progrock, Ramaratnam, Rmoyster, Sceptic, Shep, Skamandar, Skorchev, Smilysmith, Spaima, Spwdo, Sunu, Sylvaindt, Taky, Tiad, Tritri, Tupglo, Ulrikbro, Vanilla

Agenda:

Mentoring New TD’s

Adjustments – 6 typical situations

Tournament Management (Profile settings, playing TD’s, subs)

Using Forums

Software Changes

General Discussion

The meeting was opened at 11:05 ET (16:05 GMT) with a brief review of the meeting protocol.

Gwen called everyone’s attention to the sign-up area on the BBO TD’s website to sign up to Mentor New TD’s. She asked that we include a tournament day/time when we would be willing to work with new TD’s so that they can more easily be matched based on availability. It was stressed that this is an optional and voluntary effort. There was some discussion regarding how experienced a TD should be prior to signing up to Mentor and some concerns about familiarity with bridge law were raised. The general consensus was that bridge law pertains more to adjustment training and that most TD’s who are running their own tournaments are experienced enough to help a beginning TD get started. While some felt that running tournaments can be learned without it, most agreed that mentoring will be beneficial. Everyone was reminded that there is a poll available on the Forums to register our opinion on mentoring.

Gwen reported that the pilot session for the Adjustments training had taken place and that there is a write-up (done by Bubuto with the assistance of LindaB and Lolopuffin) that has been posted on the website. In addition, the pilot committee has identified 6 typical adjustment situations that a TD should be prepared to address. It was noted that these are not the only adjustment situations that will occur. Each of the 6 situations were then presented for discussion by the attendees.

Out of time – outcome of hand unclear; contract is set, but declarers/defenders do not agree on how many tricks down. How do you adjust?

ANSWER: Review the movie thoroughly, ask declarer to explain line of play. When adjusting a) err on the side of the defenders and b) use common sense.

Discussion - There was some concern expressed as to whether there would be time to ask declarer’s line of play, although most felt it was a good idea. Spwdo also suggested asking a co-TD or another TD who is experienced at adjustments to review the hand if there is time. Marc also suggested that, in a time crunch, redirect other Director calls to co-TD’s so that you can devote the time you need to this example. BB116 pointed out a flaw in the idea of asking the declarer what the line of play would be: once the adjustment request is made, the declarer also has access to his/her movie with all the hands shown which might influence an explanation of the line of play.

Pair runs out of time every round; they call for adjustment and it is clear that they would make their contract. Do you adjust?

ANSWER: Adjustment should be made with result being what it would have been had the hand been completed.

Discussion – Some felt that the pair should be penalized for being consistently late. Others cautioned against any result that would skew the scores and/or the tournament results. Most concurred with the stated solution.

Player A has missing partner but asks TD to delay subbing as partner is returning. This causes board to be skipped for time.

ANSWER: Give average- to pair causing Board to be skipped. (There was some discussion about whether Player A should have been allowed to make a decision about whether to call a sub or not.)

Discussion – A lengthy debate ensued over whether to insert a sub with or with out Player A’s permission and when to do the substitution. It was also pointed out that the opponents may actually be penalized by getting an Average + and, this being the case, the opponents should have to opportunity to agree or disagree with any delay in providing a substitute. A suggestion was made that it might be a good idea to have a policy about how long to wait, but opponents of this idea felt it would be too difficult to time disconnects since you don’t always know when they occur. There was a brief detour into the issue of whether to replace returning players but that topic was set aside for later discussion. Opinions varied greatly on the subbing issue, but no other suggestions were made for how to adjust.

Dummy Talking

ANSWER: Dummy is to remain mute. Adjust if damage has occurred. Warn and consider removal for additional infractions. Possible use of A- if it will not skew scores.

Discussion – This approach met with general approval. An additional suggestion was that the offending player’s profile be noted. The idea of having the software changed so that the Dummy’s chat could not be seen by his/her partner was discussed. This idea was not popular with the Total Points TD’s since the TP format is more social and players are allowed to visit during the play.

Failure to Alert.

ANSWER: Penalty should be assessed if there was harm. May need to ask pair claiming injury what they would have done had there been an alert.

Discussion - Some concern was expressed about the player who doesn’t explain an alerts as being a similar problem. Again, it was recommended that notes be added to the offending player’s profile and that the offending player should receive a warning. Some discussion of what should be alerted took place.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:55 ET and the remainder of the agenda held over for the next meeting.

Send mail to BBOTDs@bbofriends.com with questions or comments about this web site.