Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jonathan Steinberg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Try Cotton Candy & Peanuts!
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations Everyone! 520 comments and counting…

Art & Jim: Dead On. A 3 way final is a KO match.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike did you not write somewhere above in this going for over 500 comments thread Mike Cassel “I've said way way too much already..” Hey, Mike: I agree with you 1000% ;)!

RE: “How ow many people would think of it's a VP scoring method for a 3-way match in the open flight?” Not to sound snippy, Mike, but I would venture virtually no one reads detailed CoC. If they lived and played in D. 22 they would know from experience how it was always done (not by VP). There was nothing in the flyer. There would be no reason to assume anything other than a normal KO based on W/L and if all three teams tied the normal ACBL formula for 3-ways in KOs.

It would be incumbent upon the Tournament Director to clearly announce any unusual or new format and scoring method as this event surely was. It would be incumbent upon the Tournament Director to have the VP scale posted on the wall for all to see. Very basic stuff.

You wrote: “I do hope you all can reach consensus without appealing to authorities beyond the district.” You do have a sense of humour! That horse has left the barn a long time ago.

Last but certainly not least (are u listening Don?), I am doing my part for the “over”!
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike, if I live in a condo with a NO DOGS rule but have had a dog for the last ten years with no complaints, can the condo management now come to me and say the dog must go? I am not a lawyer but I believe the courts have ruled, no they cannot. At least where I live. Perhaps in Mississippi a ruling might be different than in California? Or in Ontario, Canada.

From what I've read on this thread the Conditions of Contest have talked about converting from W/L to VP several times but have in fact been ignored and the final day was scored as if it were a KO match. That creates a precedent.

Should it now be ignored? Especially since, as has been pointed out, two of the three teams in the final thought it was a W/L event. NO VP scale appears to have been available at the game site. Why would anyone think there was one?

What you really want to uphold is YOUR interpretation of what is or is not correct in this fiasco.

Do you also approve of the incorrect match score being submitted? Hey, everyone makes honest mistakes.

Ultimately the governing body, which is the ACBL who are in charge of the GNT National Final at the Summer NABC, MUST have the right to correct grave injustices. And I believe they do have that right, as over reaching as you may believe it is.
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you won by 12 and by 3 you are plus 15. Not to mention that you won both matches which should end the debate. If Gupta won by 17 and lost by 3, they would be plus 14. It is indeed very “innovative” to declare Gupta the winner!

Maybe this should go to an Appeals Committee. They also have a tendency to be innovative and decide winners and losers of major events.
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why would the scores be posted here? There was never any controversy over who won that match. I'm sure Finn can give you the exact numbers.

But why not give it up, Mike? The organizers had very poor CoC, the TD appears to have been incredibly inept, an incorrect final day match score was apparently given to the TD – Both teams now agree that the 25 imp margin was incorrect and should have been 17. Wei Pei's post (was it written by a lawyer?) makes that clear. Shailesh has been silent with no more talk about innovation! There can be no doubt in anyone's mind who the GNT D. 22 winners should be.

The ACBL must not give free reign to sponsoring organizations or we will get more and more poorly run events. The ACBL must provide guidance to its Tournament Chairs & GNT CoOrdinators.
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very true. I had missed Jay Whipple. There seems to be a trend here. Become ACBL President for a year and then get the heck out of Dodge as soon as possible!
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Putting aside the multiple questionable issues that transpired, the fact that an incorrect score (BOTH teams are in agreement) determined the winner, even using the revised VP scale (one should NEVER run a final that way), there is only one legitimate winner. The same team that won the RR on Saturday, won 2 matches in the 3-way final, and even won using VPs no matter what scale is used.

The only remaining question is: How long will it take before the ACBL updates its tournament results page and ACBL Live to indicate the results. It remains blank with no results posted for the event.
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had known that Bonnie Bagley (D. 17) and AL Levy (D. 24) were retiring as of the end of this year, but I am very surprised that the current ACBL President Russ Jones (D. 10) has decided not to run for reelection!
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's truly heartwarming to read about how much everyone loves each other in District 22. Bridge for Love!
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Shailesh, did your team win by 17 imps or by 25 imps? If 17, why would 25 have been reported (just enough to barely give your team the victory)?
June 3
Jonathan Steinberg edited this comment June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rick, it didn't take the ACBL too long to REMOVE the names of the “winners” and the Results on ACBL Live from last weekend's event. Has Nancy Boyd/the ACBL kept you informed? Any timeline when they will make a determinations as to what will happen?
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike C: If the Organizers and/or ACBL paid Tournament Directors screw-up, do you think they deserve a pat on the back, promotion, pay raise? If a player makes a mistake, he/she tends to be punished by the table result. Should there not be repercussions when organizers and TDs make mistakes?

When a team is told they have won the event but the VP scale is changed after play has ended and members of the winning team have left the playing site… it appears to be an egregiously bad situation.

Not only do I not consider it a “serious overreach by the league”, I consider it to be ACBL's duty to investigate alleged injustices and errors by it's staff. If the mistakes made were so bad as to invalidate the results, then so be it.

We can agree to disagree.

Looking forward to seeing you in Vegas next month :)!
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Clearly, the D. 22 GNT Finals was a fiasco on many levels. The ACBL is well aware of the ongoing controversy.

I was told (or read somewhere in this thread) that earlier in the week the results of the GNT event were posted on the ACBL tournament results page. No longer. The event is listed along with the schedule and flyer (which says nothing about the scoring methods to be used) but there are no results even though it is now one week later.

The ACBL investigation continues. Hopefully, they will announce their findings sometime within the next week. At the moment, there appears to be no official winners…
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I must disagree Shailesh. As has been pointed out by several, a KO final has a winner and a loser. If there are 3 teams (and I have played in 3 team KO finals, often as a result of an earlier screw-up or new experimental events), it is scored by who wins, NEVER by VPs. If a teams wins both, they are first. Period. If every team wins one and loses one, the ACBL KO formula is used to decide 1st, 2nd, and third. It used to be “imp quotient”. I know it well since it was my ACBL Board motion many moons ago that changed the formula to the much simpler add up all your imps won and lost as if it were a single match. In a 3 way with 2 survivors, the lowest net imp score is out. In a dreaded 3 way final, the highest imp plus is first, next is second, lowest score is third.

If the KO final was run using an illegal method, it must be reversed. I have been informed that the ACBL, Nancy Boyd in particular, is working with District 22 to reach some satisfactory resolution. We shall see.

But if this post is accurate there were multiple failures. Unclear (possible illegal) conditions of contest, different teams heard different instructions from the DIC, changing victory point formulas in mid stream, announcing the winners who go home but are then informed they lost (NOT by an appeal or a mis scored board) but by what can only be described as chaos from the organizers and DIC. It is truly incomprehensible.

As I travel around the country I see more and more Tournament Chairs who need guidance from Head Office. They are not getting it. Result: a free for all. “Ghost” KO teams in Richmond (See Jim Fox's post: Should We Be Angry"). Illegal and changing conditions of contest in the D. 22 GNT.

What will be next?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have FB messaged ACBL Executive Director Joe Jones and 2019 ACBL President Russ Jones asking if the ACBL plans to investigate this fiasco.

I have never heard of playing in a 3-way final where the team that wins both matches loses on victory points. But, hey, I have only been playing for 43 years… maybe I need more experience?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But surely the USBF Board must have open votes and public minutes. I'm curious as to the 4-3 vote. Who voted yea and who voted nay?
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is indeed a restricted link. I get the following message: “I'm sorry, the forum ”USBF Tournament Policy Committee“ is only viewable to members. You may apply for membership below.
Apply now!”
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wow! Thanks Mike Becker for the details. I am amazed that a 7 member Board of Directors would overthrow their own committee 13-17 vote and change the rules by a 4-3 vote. Awful decision, perhaps worse process.

Do all people when they are elected to a Board of Directors assume an air of superiority and suddenly discover new found knowledge?

Having served on multiple bridge related Boards… it's all very dispiriting. Many are advocating reducing the ACBL Board from 25 to 9 as a “solution” to years of mismanagement and poor decisions. But, hey, only 7 on the USBF Board.
May 29
Jonathan Steinberg edited this comment May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, one tries to bracket based on the team's masterpoint total rather than just by numbers that “work”. I don't have the exact figures but ballpark you had 4 teams with more than 25,000 masterpoints. The 5th team perhaps ten thousand. That is the type of problem that occurs everywhere to varying degrees. Having new KOs start every day makes it worse.

The Soloway format was designed for when you have 5-8 “top bracket” teams who can play in a round robin on Day one to reduce to 4 teams for head on matches on Day 2.

If you have a bracket of 9 or more teams, there is no problem and no need to do anything other than play a normal KO.
May 28
.

Bottom Home Top