[Vampyr]

My local club makes use of volunteer playing directors. Sometimes in the course of her duties, the director may find out enough about the hand to make it unplayable when it arrives at her table. In this case the director's opponents will, of course, be awarded A+, but I am uncomfortable with the idea of directors awarding themselves A+, especially as there is the possibility of this occurring on several hands (it hasn't yet) and Average seems to be a bit unfair. Is it legal to score the board A+ for the director's opponents and Not Played for the director?

[bluejak]

Vampyr, on 2011-January-30, 18:15, said:

My local club makes use of volunteer playing directors. Sometimes in the course of her duties, the director may find out enough about the hand to make it unplayable when it arrives at her table. In this case the director's opponents will, of course, be awarded A+, but I am uncomfortable with the idea of directors awarding themselves A+, especially as there is the possibility of this occurring on several hands (it hasn't yet) and Average seems to be a bit unfair. Is it legal to score the board A+ for the director's opponents and Not Played for the director?

No. Law 12C2A makes no mention of 'not played'.

Playing TDs generally accept Ave and live with it.

[jallerton]

It seems a bit harsh to imply that the TD is "partly at fault" for the board being not playable.

Many playing TDs will expect to score several percentage points lower than when not directing anyway, because they cannot devote 100% of their mental energy to the action at their table.

I think they deserve the average plus to which they appear to be entitled in these circumstances. The main reason not to is to avoid moaning from other players, most of whom do not appreciate a playing TD's problems.

[pran]

jallerton, on 2011-January-31, 02:04, said:

It seems a bit harsh to imply that the TD is "partly at fault" for the board being playable.

Many playing TDs will expect to score several percentage points lower than when not directing anyway, because they cannot devote 100% of their mental energy to the action at their table.

I think they deserve the average plus to which they appear to be entitled in these circumstances. The main reason not to is to avoid moaning from other players, most of whom do not appreciate a playing TD's problems.

When acting as playing director I prefer to have my scores based on the boards I play and not on the boards I don't play, so when it is inevitable that I must take an artificial score on a board because of my duties as director I award A to myself.

Fortunately this happens extremely seldom to me because almost every event in Norway is played as barometer where all tables play the same boards during the same round. Consequently we can usually find one of the available playing directors in the room that has already played the board in question. (When there is a call for a director a frequent shoutback is "which board?", and between the players capable as directors "I can take it".)

Also (and fully applicable at Mitchell or Howell) many calls are for simple mechanical rulings where the director can get a full picture of the case and give the ruling without seeing any card. Typical cases are revokes and leads out of turn.

Some practical adaption to regular director routines should be permissible when using playing directors.

[jallerton]

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

When acting as playing director I prefer to have my scores based on the boards I play and not on the boards I don't play, so when it is inevitable that I must take an artificial score on a board because of my duties as director I award A to myself.

If a top is 20, do you give yourself 10 MPs out of 20? If so this board is contributing to your score, making your overall perecentage closer to 50%. To avoid any influence from this board, you would have to give yourself 0 MPs out of 0 for this board. Is that legal?

Suppose that you were playing against the playing TD, whose knowledge of the hand made the board unplayable. Would you accept the average plus awarded to you by the TD?

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

Fortunately this happens extremely seldom to me because almost every event in Norway is played as barometer where all tables play the same boards during the same round. Consequently we can usually find one of the available playing directors in the room that has already played the board in question. (When there is a call for a director a frequent shoutback is "which board?", and between the players capable as directors "I can take it".)

That is fine, as long as the TD call does not happen on the first board of the round!

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

Also (and fully applicable at Mitchell or Howell) many calls are for simple mechanical rulings where the director can get a full picture of the case and give the ruling without seeing any card. Typical cases are revokes and leads out of turn.

Some practical adaption to regular director routines should be permissible when using playing directors.

I agree. Cases where the TD learns enough about the hand to make it unplayable in the context of a club evening should be rare. Most players have not turned up to hang around for seven or eight minutes making very quiet conversation.

[pran]

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

When acting as playing director I prefer to have my scores based on the boards I play and not on the boards I don't play, so when it is inevitable that I must take an artificial score on a board because of my duties as director I award A to myself.

jallerton, on 2011-February-01, 15:45, said:

If a top is 20, do you give yourself 10 MPs out of 20? If so this board is contributing to your score, making your overall perecentage closer to 50%. To avoid any influence from this board, you would have to give yourself 0 MPs out of 0 for this board. Is that legal?

Suppose that you were playing against the playing TD, whose knowledge of the hand made the board unplayable. Would you accept the average plus awarded to you by the TD?

Frankly I have a problem understanding the purpose of this comment and question. To me A is well defined and leaves no problem?

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

Fortunately this happens extremely seldom to me because almost every event in Norway is played as barometer where all tables play the same boards during the same round. Consequently we can usually find one of the available playing directors in the room that has already played the board in question. (When there is a call for a director a frequent shoutback is "which board?", and between the players capable as directors "I can take it".)

jallerton, on 2011-February-01, 15:45, said:

That is fine, as long as the TD call does not happen on the first board of the round!

Well, Nothing prevents us from asking the table to play another board while waiting for one of us to come and make a ruling.

pran, on 2011-January-31, 02:21, said:

Also (and fully applicable at Mitchell or Howell) many calls are for simple mechanical rulings where the director can get a full picture of the case and give the ruling without seeing any card. Typical cases are revokes and leads out of turn.

Some practical adaption to regular director routines should be permissible when using playing directors.

jallerton, on 2011-February-01, 15:45, said:

I agree. Cases where the TD learns enough about the hand to make it unplayable in the context of a club evening should be rare. Most players have not turned up to hang around for seven or eight minutes making very quiet conversation.

They are indeed rare. I would estimate that we have on the average maybe one TD call per Month (weekly schedule with from 7 to 20 tables playing 27 boards each week), and I cannot remember that a board has ever become unplayable for the director due to such calls.

[Vampyr]

I like Jeffrey's approach. I think that it is fair, and will probably adopt it when I have to make recommendations in the near future.

I do not think that players will moan, because they will be unlikely to even know about it, but also because it does not happen that often.