Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eitan Levy
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Roy. I have also heard positive reviews about visiting Azerbaijan but I understand that the hotel has informed the organizer that there is a law against gambling and that therefore bridge would not be allowed. I swill forward your remarks and suggestion to the organizer of the tour.
Dec. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul - my partner also says don't play bridge, and I don't take that advice!
Dec. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Where did you get this information from? The table director was not removed from his EBL job by anyone at any time and is still directing in EBL and WBF events.
Dec. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Arithmetic, David, not clothing size. There were 85 tables needed for the 2014 Opatija Teams Championship. The Open Championship will need more than double that. In Montecatini there were nearly 200 tables playing at the same time.
Nov. 13, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What an unthinking and insulting comment, implying that the EBL will keep secret hands that might show cheating. The EBL recorded and made available all the material from Opatija that was used in the crowd sourcing in the cases against the cheaters. True, there was not much action until Boye started the ball rolling. The EBL spent 250,000 euro investigating and prosecuting the cheating allegations, for the most part successfully. Unfortunately it was not successful in one case but certainly not for want of trying. The EBL has introduced and is introducing improved methods of videotaping play, and other safeguards. I know for a fact that all existing material, including videos, are freely available from all EBL events.

I do not know what the attitude of the EBL was in 1997 towards cheating, but I do know what the attitude is now and what is has been for at least the last 5 years that I have been an executive committee member. The EBL will do all in its power to prevent cheating and will actively investigate and if necessary prosecute suspicions of cheating .

If there are hand records or any other material from 1997 they will be made available. Apparently they are not available on the EBL site, although the bulletins are. One cannot compare record keeping today with record keeping in pre- or early digital days. If the hand records for Open round 27 do exist somewhere in EBL archives Avon, or anyone else, will get them.
Oct. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once upon a time in the EBL and WBF, there was a recorder at every table recording the bidding, each card played and the result. This resulted in piles of paper records that hardly anybody ever looked at. A waste of manpower, time, paper and money. It was stopped about 12 years ago, I think more-or-less when bridgemates were introduced.
Aug. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, badly worded. I meant ‘score’ not ‘revoke’ and should have written “correction of score following revoke” and not “correction of revoke”. The OP was about correcting the score not the revoke.
In practice 64C1 allows adjusting the score even if the time limits set in 64B4 and 64B5 have passed but only if the non-revoker is damaged by the revoke.
Dec. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 64C1specifically gives the TD the right to award an adjusted score based on the result that would have been obtained without the revoke, even if the time limit of correction of the score following a revoke has passed. (There may be other regulations for that event that set time limits generally for corrections to scores.)
Dec. 5, 2017
Eitan Levy edited this comment Dec. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rosalind - read the WBF Alert Policy carefully, especially item #2. Non-conventional (=natural?) bids can be alertable “Those bids which have special meanings or which are based on or lead to special understandings between the partners” are alertable.
Sept. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ellis: ..“however what exactly does the IBF do in 5 years time, when a European championship is held in Israel”

FS are banned for life from representing Israel. So the IBF would select a team that could not include FS. The same would apply to a European Championship held anywhere. WTP?
Feb. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Section 7 of the Letter of Appointment of the Special Ethics Committee:
“The Committee's decisions shall be final, binding and without appeal and shall be subject to no other form of procedure within the IBF. This shall not derogate from any authority by a judicial court.”
Feb. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not,exactly - quote from the by-laws of the EBL:

a) The NBOs as members of the EBL must recognize each other reciprocally as Organisations exclusively controlling bridge in their respective countries.
b) Each NBO within the EBL must accept and respect all decisions taken by the EBL and other NBOs in disciplinary matters. In particular, all NBOs within the EBL shall recognize the EBL’s and each other's suspensions and expulsions, without examining the reason therefore.
c) NBOs shall report their suspensions and expulsions in a timely manner to the EBL which will publish the information to all other NBOs.

I am not sure about the WBF regulations.
Feb. 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The EBL some time ago decided to name the categories Under 26 (UI26), U21, U16 and U26 Women. For example, the European Open Pairs Championships last month in Latvia used these terms exclusively, as can also be seen in an example of the Championships Bulletin
http://www.eurobridge.org/repository/competitions/16liepaja/microsite/bulletins/Bul_05.pdf
Aug. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, 30 minutes seems far too short. The Laws of Bridge give a time for correction of errors as “30 minutes after the official score has been made available for inspection”. But this is a default time limit - the Laws specifically state that the Tournament Organizer may specify a different time limit (1 hour, 1 day, 1 week ….) and may also specify circumstances to which the limit may not apply.
This time limit could very well be different for different events or different stages of an event, but the Organizer is responsible for setting these limits.
The time limit is the latest time a protest can be made - the discussion and decision can be taken later. A TD doesn't have to be physically present to receive a protest It is sufficient to provide a phone number for a TD on duty to duly note that there has been a protest within the time limit.

As an example of an organizer varying the time limits, this is from the Conditions for the last European Open Championships that were held in Tromso, Norway:
“In respect of scores the protest time of all boards played in a day is as follows:
(a) If the day includes a change of stage, protest time ends 30 minutes after the posting of scores of the last round of the stage.
(b) If the day does not include a change of stage, or if the protest is in respect of a round after the change of stage, protest time ends at the starting time of the first match on the following day.
© In respect of the final day’s play protest time ends two hours after the official finishing time of the final match but, in any case, not later than the official starting time of the Prize-giving ceremony or Closing Ceremony.”
June 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Laws of Bridge allow the organisers to set a time limit for correcting errors, failing which the limit in Law 79C applies. There is nothing in the Conditions of Contest about a time limit for correction of score, so Law 79C applies:

“79C. Error in Score

1. An error in computing or tabulating the agreed-upon score, whether made by a player or scorer, may be corrected until the expiration of the period specified by the Tournament Organizer. Unless the Tournament Organizer specifies a later* time, this Correction Period expires 30 minutes after the official score has been made available for inspection.

2. Regulations may provide for circumstances in which a scoring error may be corrected after expiry of the Correction Period if the Director and the Tournament Organizer are both satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the record is wrong.

* An earlier time may be specified when required by the special nature of a contest.”

In addition, Law 79B refers specifically to a disagreement about a claim, and refers to Law 69 which allows in certain circumstances withdrawing agreement to a claim, but again subject to the time limit established in Law 79C.
May 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One of the main problems with this type of claim is that competent directors are likely to rule differently in the same situation. (This is also reflected in the comments on this thread).
Law 70E dealing with unstated line of play includes the following:
“2. The Regulating Authority may specify an order (e.g. “from the top down”) in which the Director shall deem a suit played if this was not clarified in the statement of claim (but always subject to any other requirement of this Law).”
In accordance with this and with the aim of establishing consistency the Israel BF adopted the regulation (freely translated): When playing a suit (including trumps) after such a claim, the order is “top down”. When trumping an opponent’s led suit, the order is “bottom up”. (However, if by following this regulation claimer benefits, then the opposite is applied.)
There has been some criticism of this regulation outside Israel, but it is in accordance with the laws and the consistency and clear-cut decisions have prevented much argument and bad feeling.
Having said all that, if the claimer makes a clear statement there is no problem at all, but unfortunately it seems that educating claimers to do this is a mission impossible.
April 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Buddy Hanby is correct. The regulation of the EBU is defined in the White Book, and in the edition of the White Book valid in 2012 it is 100% clear (#16.8):
“When there is a Stop bid, the mandated ten seconds pause by left hand opponent is free thinking time. Any alleged pause is above and beyond that time.”
Jan. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As far as I understand qualification for ECC is through the same tournament as for BB, so this qualification was also with BZ on board.
:)Yu

Paul, Yu's understanding is 100% correct. The results of the European Championships in Opatija in 2014 determined which NBOs would be entitled to enter a (national)team in the 2015 BB and also which NBOs would be entitled to enter a (club) team in the 2014 and 2015 CCs.
Nov. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The top 10 teams from the last European Teams Champs.(in Opatija) qualify + last year's winners + hosts. Israel, Monaco, Germany withdrew, so teams ranked 11,12,13 qualified for the CC. Now Poland withdrew, so the team ranked 14, which is Italy, qualifies. Italy are also the holders, so there will be two Italian teams. As England are the hosts there are also two England teams.
Nov. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From the screen regulations of the EBL:

“With screens in use a call is considered ‘made’ when placed on the tray and released.”
and also
“Changes to Bids Made:
A call placed and released may be changed under the Director's supervision:
a) If it is illegal or inadmissible (in which case the change is obligatory), as soon as either screenmate is aware of this; or
b) If it is determined by the Director to be a call inadvertently selected or
c) Under the provisions of Law 25. Under the provisions of Law 25A it should be noted that if a player's attention is diverted as he makes an
unintended call the ‘pause for thought’ should be assessed from the moment when he first recognizes his error.”

and from the WBF:
“A call is considered to have been made when
the bidding card(s) is removed from the bidding box with apparent intent (but Law 25 may apply and if a player's mind was elsewhere as he makes an unintended call the ‘pause for thought’ should be assessed from the moment
when he first recognizes his error).”
Oct. 31, 2015
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top