[Trinidad]

jillybean, on 2015-January-07, 01:23, said:

If this is anyone other than a newbie, I give them a penalty for not paying attention to the game.

74 B 1. paying insufficient attention to the game.

BTW, are penalties routinely handed out in the Netherlands or do players abide by the laws?

You hand out PPs to everybody who is absent minded for a second? I can just imagine the results at your MP pairs: "And the winner tonight, with the fabulous score of 35%, is..."

The Netherlands is like other countries. There are bridge clubs and "bridge" clubs. The big difference is the density of bridge clubs and the amount of bridge players. I live in an industrial town of about 60 000 inhabitants. Though the Dutch bridge population is typically not made up of factory workers (and the socialist party is very big in this town), this town has 4 bridge clubs, each with about 100 players, and these are the clubs that are associated with the Dutch Bridge League (NBB). In addition, there are probably about 20 clubs, typically with about 20 players at churches, elderly homes, factories, schools, etc. that are not associated with the NBB.

Do not call for the TD at the home for the elderly. This is a "bridge club" and PPs... well, you get the idea.

At the associated clubs, the real bridge clubs, the standards vary. But at most clubs calling the TD is normal and not frowned upon. The simple reason is that a large part of the players in these clubs play in the competitions organized by the NBB: They play interclub team games and MP pair games, organized by the NBB, once or twice a month, where there are quality TDs at the playing site and play is "by the book". If 70% of your players are used to playing by the book (which they like) then they will drag the remaining 30% of their club with them to also play by the book. That doesn't mean that they want that their TD to continuously hand out PPs to the weaker and less experienced players of the club, but they do expect the TD to educate these people and raise the standard.

I myself do not play at any of the clubs in my town (except for the occasional relaxed Summer bridge and the local, even more relaxed café drive). I play in a club that was set up to gather the best players from the region and let them play against each other. In this club, I meet the best players of these four bridge clubs from the town where I live, as well as the top players from other towns, typically from within a radius of 50 km (30 miles), an area with, I guess, 400 000 inhabitants. Obviously, at this club, for competitive bridge, there are several competent nationally certified TDs, and nobody raises an eyebrow when a TD is called. PPs are rare, since generally the Laws are followed, with the exception of the occasional silly mistake (like thinking that you are on lead and asking questions), which we typically would not penalize. Over 95% of the penalties that are handed out are time penalties, since we play 28 boards per evening and some people need to travel somewhat longer with a working day next morning, so we want the club night to run smoothly.

Rik

[blackshoe]

jillybean, on 2015-January-07, 08:37, said:

I am sure there were no penalties applied. I assume a PP would result in a score adjustment on the board in question?
Since penalties are not used in the games I play in, I do not know what they look like.

As far as a DP for my comment, the opponents didn't mention it.

The penalty is applied, in ACBLScore, using the "ADJ" function. This is not a change to a score on a specific board. There is one report, using the "LIST" function, I think, that shows any penalties in an additional column to the MP scores for boards played (or adjusted). Other reports, I think (it's been a while) the total MPs for a pair are the sum of the MPs for each board less the sum of any penalties, but you don't get a clear indication of why the total doesn't "add up" to the sum of the board scores.

[Mbodell]

barmar, on 2015-January-07, 11:23, said:

IMO, the infraction of asking the question before partner has selected a lead is a very minor one. The player could have asked the same question at their last turn to bid. Bridge authorities generally recommend against asking questions if the answer won't affect your bidding, but there's no law against it (except "asking solely for partner's benefit"). If there's any UI, it's essentially the same in both cases.

This was an issue for me last year in a situation where opponent got upset somewhat similar to the OP (but at my final call). My opponents in a team game qualifier had an artificial complex auction (which neither my partner or I asked about during the complex part of the auction) to a suit grand slam. I was in the final pass out suit. I had a side void. My partner was going to be on lead. I was worried the opponents might be able to make 7nt. I now needed to know about the opponents auction to judge am I better to pass and hope partner finds the right lead, X for the right lead but hope the opponents don't find the escape to 7nt, or X for the right lead knowing the opponents likely didn't have anywhere to escape. Obviously there is some amount of UI involved in asking, but I asked the opponents to explain their auction. My RHO immediately objected and said "you will not be on lead you can't ask!" And then followed up with "unless I guess it could influence your bid, are you thinking of bidding?", which needless to say ups the amount of extra information involved and focus on my questions. The director ended up needing to be called because the opponents both would not explain their auction and also demanded that I be reprimanded for incorrectly asking at this point in time. The director pulled me away from the table to ask if I was thinking about bidding depending on the answer, to which I said yes and explained. Back at the table the director asked the opponents to explain. I eventually got the information and it seemed likely that 7nt would indeed make. If the opponents had quickly and quietly explained in response to my original query maybe I would have been able to pass, but given this massive disturbance and what not made crystal clear that I was thinking of acting, I sort of felt backed into making the X. My RHO after thinking for a while did then pull to 7nt which did in fact make.

[mycroft]

The reason it's not recommended (but Lawful) is *because* the UI is the same. *Most* people who ask here - especially about blackwood responses - are concerned it's the last time they can ask, or maybe "oh if this is really weird I might want to bid", and not even subconsciously asking because the club bid is weird. But Most Is Not All, and most cases aren't Blackwood Responses.

The biggest issue I had when I played OKB regularly was "crazy Precision auction, everything Alerted, auction ending in 3NT, query about 3♦. I explain, and 'oh look, a diamond lead into partner's AQTxx. What a surprise.'" I'm sure that *that* wasn't deliberate (on either side), but the patternmatching brain of ours sure is good at pattern matching. (Note, my response to that was to self-explain immediately, not just self-Alert, all my calls; when we were in crazy asking bid sequence, self-Alert, then as soon as the call was made, go back and put in the explanation. Didn't stop people from clicking on one particular call, though - and those almost always were "hey partner lead this" suits).

It's discouraged because in many cases (oddly enough, blackwood responses being one of the exceptions), the question asked is about an odd call given our hand, and partner will subconsciously pick up on it, and now we have a UI case that could have been avoided if we'd passed and waited for "questions, partner?"

Side pet peeve, because I played out-of-province over the holidays: "what was [response to 4NT]?" "Oh, we play 1430" (or, response to "what's [Alerted overcall of 1NT]?" "We play Hamilton". "So?" Why does everyone think I should do all the translation? I guess I'm getting to be the Grumpy Old Man. (To an extent I do understand it because I get the opposite followup questions - "So, you play DONT?" or "So, you play 1430?" after my explanation of what the call showed. They *need to know* the system for some reason, which I don't get, but it does explain the fetish for giving convention name responses).

[barmar]

Trinidad, on 2015-January-07, 12:58, said:

The Netherlands is like other countries. There are bridge clubs and "bridge" clubs. The big difference is the density of bridge clubs and the amount of bridge players. I live in an industrial town of about 60 000 inhabitants. Though the Dutch bridge population is typically not made up of factory workers (and the socialist party is very big in this town), this town has 4 bridge clubs, each with about 100 players, and these are the clubs that are associated with the Dutch Bridge League (NBB). In addition, there are probably about 20 clubs, typically with about 20 players at churches, elderly homes, factories, schools, etc. that are not associated with the NBB.

Ouch! The entire Boston metropolitan area, with a population around 4.5 million, only has about a half dozen bridge clubs.

[aguahombre]

barmar, on 2015-January-08, 14:01, said:

Ouch! The entire Boston metropolitan area, with a population around 4.5 million, only has about a half dozen bridge clubs.

Is that about a 70-1 ratio of pubs to bridge clubs?