Join Bridge Winners
When and how should directors educate players about ethics?

In a recent Flight A regional Swiss my opponent held:

West
J
J107
AKQ8752
98
W
N
E
S
1
P
1
P
1
P
2
P
3
P
3
P
3NT
P
P
P

The 2 bid was "XYZ", so artificial and game forcing, but was not alerted.

Before the opening lead, West said there had been a failure to alert.

Upon seeing the dummy, I called the director.  West's 3 bid seemed like a blatant use of UI, from an experienced player.   A 3 bid would be completely normal with that hand, and obviously is less attractive if partner might not know that 2 was intended as artificial and game forcing.

The director was called back at the end of the hand.  3N had gone down one, and it was unlikely the defense would have achieved a better result than that if W had bid 3.  However, I thought that it should be looked at, and whether or not there was to be an adjustment, that the 3 bid was a serious problem.

The director returned later in the match and said something like, ..I don't see any way for you to do better...  I asked if he saw any problem with what had happened, and he simply said "no" and went away.

I'm sure some will think that a player memo is the best way to address what this player did.   In fact, in discussion with myself and one of their teammates after the match, I believe they came to understand that what they'd done was wrong, and why.   This was possible because this is a calm and reasonable person who generally tries to do the right thing and had failed.  However, if they had not approached me, I would not have followed up directly (not my job/place, right?) and they might have never come to understand.

What should the director's role and responsibilities be here?   

Is there any relevant official ACBL policy?

Fwiw, this was, I am pretty sure, a relatively senior ACBL director.

118 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top