Join Bridge Winners
What is a tournament directors job?

         When an irregularity occurs at the table, is the job of a TD to explain the rule as they see fit, or is to explain the rule so that the person understands it? Within the last three months, I have been playing with two partners who have not fully understood the ramifications of the explanation given at the table when whatever action they take, including pass, will bar me. The same director explained the rule both times. How many people understood this rule the first time it was explained to them? Did you just bid 3nt with your 17 high? Maybe that is something you have to learn the hard way. I think maybe you do. What about if you are about to answer key card, the opponent interferes and you make an insufficient artificial bid?  Should our side be protected if the explanation is not understood and you now pass. You would never pass and let the opponents play 5D undoubled white when your partner was investigating slam. Or is that something else you just have to get the hard way. Clearly, on the second example, you would never pass if you understood what was going to happen.   

          What am I supposed to do as a partner when I can see my partner does not understand. Am I supposed to just be unlucky when the director is called and the same one appears who my partners never understand. Am I supposed to sit their and say nothing as my partner looks like a deer in headlights? The second situation actually occurred during my last tournament.  I told the director my partner did not understand what was being said. I was looked at sternly and the director repeated the same explanation they had already given five times. Yes, the same one that was not understood the first time. At that time, I said to my partner you set the contract. The director said no that was not correct the opponents were still allow to bid. I said if they do not bid you set the contract. Shockingly, understanding flooded into her face and she bid five of our suit.

          The director, later pulled me aside and said that was considered coaching, and I would be penalized if it happened again. Was I coaching her to understand the rule and it's ramifications? Personally,  I think it is the directors job to explain a rule in a way that a person will understand it and be able to apply it. I  was also told that this often happens with my partners and it was my job to explain it to them. I was quite unsure if that was correct. Do you need to know and understand the laws that apply when an irregularity occurs to play the game or is that what directors are for? I want the explanation to this rule to be worded so that people understand it. I want the director to care if my partner does not understand a rule and phrase the explanation another way so they have a chance. I want to lose because we missed a game or bid a bad slam, not because the director explained a rule in such a way that causes my partner to be confused and do something that defies bridge logic.

         I went to the director in charge when I had a break. I asked why I could not say that to my partner. I asked why the director did not say that to my partner so she might understand. He said directors are not allowed to suggest an action to a player. How is telling a person that if they pass and the opponents pass this will be the final contract and if they bid that will be the final contract unless the opponents bid again, suggesting an action? They must pass or bid for the game to continue.

       Is there an effective way a director should explain this rule so a person can understand and apply it?

       

156 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top