Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Robb Gordon
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Never! No to electronics, it's not Bridge”
I am not surprised to see this comment, but I am certainly surprised to see it from one of your generation Diego! Didn't you grow up with this stuff?
I wish it wasn't so either but I think it's inevitable.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And the '68 season - year of the pitcher. I got to go to 2 World Series games in Detroit including the pivotal game 5. What a treat for a 12 year old! Gibson had a season ERA of 1.12. For a starting pitcher, THAT is a record that will never be broken!
March 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've seen a LOT of baseball. If I were a player the pitcher I would most fear batting against would have been Gibson. You could get hit if you got too close, and worse, he could really embarrass a batter he blew them away so much.
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What people sometimes forget is the additional cost for space. You need about 3x the square feet for tables with screens.
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Joe Girardi was a participant as well as Paul O'Neill
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Luckily, there's an empirical test. The OP says that he sent the hand off to the recorder. Perhaps he will let us know what the consequence is.”

This thread was brought to my attention. I can promise than any Player Memo received by the Office of National Recorder will be dealt with and at a minimum, the reporter will receive an acknowledgment of receipt and information as to who (National Recorder, District Recorder, or Unit Recorder) is in charge of the investigation, or, if it is inappropriate for a Recorder to handle, the reporter will be referred to the right place.

In this particular case, I would point out that the OP is from New Zealand. Presumably, the incident occurred in New Zealand. New Zealand is, of course, not ACBL territory.

Robb Gordon
National Recorder - ACBL
March 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No it is NOT acceptable (neither is smoking a cigarette in or near the playing area). But all of this is beside the point. Mr. Helgemo was not convicted of taking recreational drugs legal or otherwise. The ACBL policy does not allow drug laws (or any other laws) to be violated at its tournaments.
March 8
Robb Gordon edited this comment March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Funny I knew the reference without checking the link. At one point I think I had the whole script memorized.
March 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very sad. RIP.
March 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am living in Prescott till June. After that we may stay or try Tucson for awhile.
March 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is nothing illegal about the question. The player is entitled to ask a question at his turn. HOWEVER Law 16B1 states:

Any extraneous information from partner that might suggest a call or play is unauthorized. This includes remarks, questions, replies to questions, unexpected alerts or failures to alert, unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement or mannerism.

Therefore, per Law 16B1(a): A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over another by unauthorized information if the other call or play is a logical alternative.

In other words, you are free to break tempo or ask a question, but in doing so you may create an obligation for your partner that works to your detriment.
March 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“ what if I went to a tournament threatened another player could I argue can't suspend it is not cheating?” The ACBL has jurisdiction over tournaments so I don't understand the question.
March 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The last few were. I am pretty sure Bobby Wolff and Bob Rosen were not.
March 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am an employee. I thought that was well known.
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have been with the ACBL since September 2017. I realize things were done a bit “differently” historically. I am trying to do better. But I can't answer for any past sins.
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We are getting WAY off topic here, but I will respond to a couple of things.

1. “a player at my club threatened another player and his wife”
Indeed that is very bad behavior, but it isn't cheating at bridge.

2. “… if I bar a player with a very valid reason why do I have to allow him back to play if I run a STAC or any special game?”

You do NOT have to allow him to play if when you bar him, it is an “extended” barring. However, that portion of the barring may be appealed to the Unit Board. Only that portion.
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Randy Breuer, not quite true. Under Unit Jurisdiction:

CDR 2.2.1 (d) Persons participating in a club sponsored ACBL sanctioned event held within the Unit’s geographical boundaries relating to Complaints of alleged (i) cheating by use of signals, other unauthorized information or other forms of cheating or (ii) serious breaches of ethics.
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That’s true Don. Perhaps I should have waited for that on Monday but I thought the subject was of sufficient interest to put it out to the community sooner.
March 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robb doesn't. This was not a unilateral statement.
March 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Although David Burn and I seem to agree on the correct ruling here, I disagree with one of his comments in this thread.

“No, it isn't. 5♠ is an enquiry made by the man in charge of the auction. 6♥ is a sign-off made by the man in charge of the auction. And you bid seven. You genius, you”

MANY pairs (at least on this side of the pond) play this or any bid that makes playing a slam inevitable promises all the keycards. Some don't. But I don't think this pronouncement is valid since it is hardly universal.
Feb. 22
.

Bottom Home Top