Robin_BarkerTD
Comments
-
An error in making up the boards - or other mismatch between the hands and file uploaded to BCS?
-
I expect to put something in the WB. We need to say which law book applies, and capture something about Law 89. (In August 2024)
-
I think that there is misinformation in the original case. The pair should recognise that lack of a forcing raise may be solved (sometimes?) by bidding the other minor with less than 3 cards, and that this response is 'natural or a raise'.
-
(Quote)
Which supports my adjustment.
-
(Quote)
+1
-
Opener is entitled to be correctly informed about 2C before bidding 2D. The TD should have been called when West gave the late alert/explanation. It appears likely that North would pass 2C if it shows the majors and is often forgotten, in which …
-
By all means penalise creation of unauthorised information by score penalties or disciplinary processes, if that's what your regulating authority thinks is the way to implement Law 89.
I will wait for a guidance/instruction from the Laws…
-
Law 73C has "Incidental" added to the heading.
-
If a player creates unauthorised information in an attempt to communicate with partner this is in scope of Law 89.
A player who creates unauthorised information for a legitimate bridge reason (thinking, informing the opponents, attempting…
-
The intention of Law 89 if to facilitate the prosecution and conviction of cheats by disciplinary process of Regulating Authorities, including the use of statistical evidence. I do not expect TDs to rule under Law 89 except to report suspicious …
-
73C has been renamed to 'Incidental Unauthorised Information'. I think the intention that incidental UI is to be dealt with by 16B and 73C2, and is out of scope of 89.
-
The last option is M135 'Scorebreak, Tables in Single line, User specified start move'
Selecting this movement gives options for 'EW Move from Home Table;
Inital: Up 4, 4 rounds
Later: Up 3, 4 rounds.The double move (E…
-
You can play 8 x 5 as american whist with 45 boards in play, you can arrange this so that 4 matches are complete at half time, so teams can score up, but the board remain live. You can also play the '4N+1' movement with 5 board rounds - each ses…
-
Well done with the attachment. I deleted the intermediate posts
-
The referee's decision trumps the senior TD's ruling because the referee is an appeals committee, and if an appeals committee decision could not override the TD decision, there would be no point in allowing an appeal process.
The laws on …
-
This is explained in two documents
https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/competitions/regulations-and-cond… -
The version dated 7 August is final and had a different url from the drafts.
https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/laws-and-ethics/blue-book/blue-book… -
Various parts of Law 47 could apply - but it if the lead is withdrawn it will not be a penalty card.
- The other (wrong) defender has already led face up
- Mistaken explanation by the opponents - see Gordon's reply
-
Card exposed as part of a claim are not penalty cards and a defender not on lead can claim. So Law 70 nor Law 49 applies. BUT
(Quote)So a club lead from partner being "reasonable" it not enough. It has to be the only normal play.
Both of these are legal agreements
- 2C = strong, or intermediate with clubs
- 2C = strong, or intermediate with a long suit which is not clubs
But this is not a legal agreement
- 2C = strong, or intermed…
Welcome
For regulations, 'strong' is a defined term - 16+ HCP or 13+ HCP in two suits of combined length 10+.
This hand is not 'strong' - not enough HCP.
The agreement to open 2C on all hands which they regards as strong b…
Same link: https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/laws-and-ethics/blue-book/blue-book.pdf
PDF are apt to be cached - try refresh and rerefresh…
It is not an illegal bid. The regulations regulate agreements, not bids. If the director rules that the bid was not based on a partnership agreement, then there is no illegal agreement, and no adjustment/penalty.
In general, if a player…
(Quote)Looking at this again, I think "opening bid strength" (6D1(c)) should be read as "11 HCP", which seems the usual lower limit for a "precision 2D opening" in the 'literature' in Is this legal Comment by Robin_BarkerTD October 2023
The looks like something the TD would let the player 'get away with' once. The hand and the excuse should be recorded.
On page 7 of the full NGS guide
(Quote)
https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/miscellaneous/ngs/full-guide.pdfIn the NGS guide, events where …
If the TD is happy that there is no misinformation (but see previous) and that Pass is a logical alternative to 3C by East, then the result should be adjusted to 2S by West going off.
David
Thanks again. When I wrote up your issue on the Blue Book issues list, I noted that 'rule of 20' does not allow 4414 11HCP which could be a minimum precision 2D opening at in Is this legal Comment by Robin_BarkerTD September 2023
Thanks David.
I think the resolution will be to change the level 2 regulations from 'opening bid strength' to 'rule of 20'.
As I have noted before, the Level 2 regulations were more descriptive than prescriptive - this has changed…
(Quote)Thanks. I marked up the number list.