[awm]

This came up in a local tournament today. Suppose that a team finishes several rounds of a swiss teams event late. Each time they finish late, they are assessed a penalty (actually a "warning" the first time, 2 VPs the second time, 4 VPs the third time). The teams so penalized were never informed that such a penalty was being assessed, and were quite surprised to find that their final scores were not what they had expected.

The directors did claim that a general announcement about this policy had been made early in the event, but the room was crowded and loud, there was no microphone, and most people didn't hear any such announcement. They admitted that no effort had been made to notify the specific teams being penalized.

Is there a problem with this?

[Bbradley62]

Without knowing what the laws or regulations (which, I presume, vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction) require, I would hope that this penalty structure would be considered part of the Conditions of Contest and should be properly publicized to all potential entrants, similar to whether the event would be scored on wins-losses or victory points (and, if vp, what scale).

[Bbradley62]

 awm, on 2012-April-15, 22:05, said:

...actually a "warning" the first time, 2 VPs the second time, 4 VPs the third time...

How does someone get a warning without knowing?

[blackshoe]

I would expect they knew they got a warning.

[aguahombre]

I was wondering how their total VP's were kept a secret after each match.

Maybe I was under the false impression that the purpose of the penalties was to change the behavior. If the team is not being told each time, then the purpose was just to penalize.

[Bbradley62]

It very well may change their behavior... they might not come to the tournament next time...

[awm]

 blackshoe, on 2012-April-15, 22:20, said:

I would expect they knew they got a warning.

Nope. The "warning" was just that the first penalty was 0 VPs. There was no verbal warning.

[pran]

 awm, on 2012-April-15, 22:59, said:

Nope. The "warning" was just that the first penalty was 0 VPs. There was no verbal warning.

It is not a warning when the warned players are unaware that they have been warned.

But it is evidence of sloppy management.

[Bbradley62]

It would be nice if the people who say "laws/regulations require it" would post and cite the relevant laws/regulation.

[aguahombre]

Whatever this poll might show about our opinions on what they can do, that isn't any way to run things.

You probably are not going to let it slide as a mere BBO forum discussion; let us know what happens as far as how they will be handling a situation like this in the future.

[blackshoe]

I have little sympathy for a bunch of people who won't STFU when the folks running the tournament are trying to give instructions. OTOH, it seems to me that TDs who do not inform contestants of rulings that involve those contestants, at the time such rulings are made, aren't doing their job and should be taken to task for it. If nothing else, they may have deprived such contestants of the right to appeal the ruling. If you want law cites, look to 80 and 81, and since I referenced appeals, 92 and 93.

[Phil]

In the Fast Pairs you are not told you were penalized until the recap comes out.

In the Reisinger this year, I received my first slow penalty ever. I got a little annoyed at the director, because it was the other pairs that created the delay. He claimed he followed me for three consecutive rounds and we started late on each one. I said, "good, then if you are following me then you could see that we weren't the ones causing the delay". He didn't have a response to that.

[blackshoe]

If the CoC of the Fast Pairs (or any event) specifies that's when you get notified, fine. You still have 30 minutes to appeal. If not, then it's not fine, IMO.

[Vampyr]

 Bbradley62, on 2012-April-16, 07:45, said:

It would be nice if the people who say "laws/regulations require it" would post and cite the relevant laws/regulation.

The poll options should have included "If it is not required by the regulations in force, it is a serious oversight". I think people were unwilling to say it was merely "polite" to inform the players that they were being penalised (and warned, LOL).

[Bbradley62]

 blackshoe, on 2012-April-16, 08:16, said:

I have little sympathy for a bunch of people who won't STFU when the folks running the tournament are trying to give instructions. OTOH, it seems to me that TDs who do not inform contestants of rulings that involve those contestants, at the time such rulings are made, aren't doing their job and should be taken to task for it. If nothing else, they may have deprived such contestants of the right to appeal the ruling. If you want law cites, look to 80 and 81, and since I referenced appeals, 92 and 93.

I completely agree with your first two sentences. The last two sentences are nonsense. I have read Laws 80 and 81, and do not see anything that is directly on-point. When I requested that a law/reg be cited, I was hoping that someone would says "the applicable sentence is this, because..." not for a semi-flippant suggestion of looking in this general area. It appears to me that lateness penalties are Procedural Penalties under Law 90B2, unless the director says that he's issuing the penalties "in order to maintain order and discipline" under Law 91A, in which case his imposed penalty is not subject to appeal. Of course, the primary question here is about notification of those penalized, and I still do not see anything on-point.

[blackshoe]

Nonsense, is it? Very well, then I guess there's no point in further discussion with you.

[jh51]

Playing in a local tournament recently, I observed a similar complaint, but the facs were:

1) At the beginning of the event, the TD announced that late plays would be penalized.
2) Any result delivered after the clock expired was considered late.
3) It was recommended that no new should be started after the director announced that there was 10 minutes left on the clock.
4) The announcement stated there would be a warning on the first offence if the lateness was under a certain amount.
5) The announcement also stated that the penalties would be assessed without further notification.

I thought all this was quite clear. But members of one team were complaining at the end of the event because they had twice been assessed penalties. The director pointed out that they had been late on 3 occassions, and had been warned on the first one. While he did not specifically mention the penalties to the team on the 2nd and 3rd occassion, he did mention each time that they were late.

I did not have a lot of sympathy for the players involved.

[Vampyr]

Where are you writing from, jh? The ACBL also?

I found the OP shocking, and I had assumed that this was the only time, anywhere, that assessing penalties without notifying the teams in question had happened.

[barmar]

No new board with 10 minutes on the clock? At our local tournaments, that announcement usually comes when there's 3 or 4 minutes left -- if you play quickly, you can often get 2 boards done in 10 minutes.

However, our clocks are for the play period, they don't include the time for computing IMPs with teammates. This should rarely take more than a minute or two.

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2012-April-16, 18:21, said:

I found the OP shocking, and I had assumed that this was the only time, anywhere, that assessing penalties without notifying the teams in question had happened.

Reasonable assumption. But, I have seen some incredible bullying by the TD's in last-day Swiss events. Yanking one board (of six) without warning when there is 8 or nine on the clock, for instance; so I guess this shouldn't be a surprise.