Meta tags:

Headings (most frequently used words):

2009, sunday, july, about, bridge, blog, links, to, what, who, makes, the, rules, davidc, 13, december, november, august, 26, 19, saturday, 18, bidding, theory, other, blogs, archive, labels, me, system, notes, so, bad, transfer, openings, tabr4, three, answers, every, question, tabr3, part, tabr2, thoughts, regulations, introduction, up,

Text of the page (most frequently used words):
the (195), that (79), and (66), are (48), this (45), you (43), have (38), for (38), but (34), about (33), not (32), what (32), they (32), regulations (31), can (29), #regulation (24), there (22), nbo (22), has (19), club (19), should (18), these (18), all (17), who (16), when (15), things (15), which (14), very (14), really (14), then (14), wbf (14), bridge (13), illegal (13), may (12), laws (12), their (12), system (11), was (11), time (11), one (11), people (11), think (11), point (11), with (11), his (11), rules (11), davidc (10), something (10), make (10), players (10), them (10), know (10), been (9), from (9), will (9), going (9), say (9), would (9), post (9), best (9), right (9), way (9), opponents (9), here (8), get (8), now (8), always (8), question (8), different (8), doesn (8), like (8), whether (8), authority (8), alert (8), transfer (8), view (7), 2009 (7), blog (7), posts (7), posted (7), particularly (7), come (7), makes (7), enough (7), more (7), out (7), too (7), level (7), tds (7), answer (7), well (7), even (7), committee (7), three (7), want (7), openings (7), systems (6), series (6), general (6), might (6), comments (6), good (6), mean (6), some (6), put (6), find (6), just (6), feel (6), much (6), don (6), bad (6), over (6), its (6), any (6), between (6), clubs (6), call (6), tabr (5), regs (5), ebu (5), bidding (5), labels (5), july (5), work (5), two (5), need (5), most (5), legal (5), down (5), before (5), law (5), pretty (5), means (5), link (5), follow (5), ask (5), chain (5), decide (5), sunday (5), someone (5), bid (5), notes (4), other (4), theory (4), last (4), proper (4), bit (4), first (4), nice (4), talking (4), philosophy (4), stuff (4), care (4), sort (4), take (4), easy (4), actually (4), see (4), those (4), place (4), particular (4), only (4), wrong (4), acbl (4), many (4), try (4), changed (4), against (4), because (4), direct (4), require (4), tournament (4), made (4), nbos (4), through (4), change (4), let (4), everyone (4), situation (4), how (4), thinking (4), necessarily (4), alertable (4), questions (4), player (4), exactly (4), look (4), bids (4), december (3), march (3), april (3), comment (3), recently (3), into (3), played (3), where (3), able (3), individual (3), never (3), had (3), talk (3), alerted (3), than (3), arguments (3), often (3), aside (3), interesting (3), new (3), order (3), expect (3), personally (3), above (3), trying (3), must (3), difficult (3), certainly (3), mentioned (3), seems (3), seen (3), indeed (3), main (3), reason (3), better (3), apply (3), organization (3), done (3), believe (3), why (3), principle (3), does (3), says (3), rule (3), isn (3), given (3), least (3), four (3), previous (3), process (3), possible (3), similar (3), answers (3), happen (3), likely (3), doing (3), sure (3), lose (3), action (3), matter (3), regulating (3), both (3), elected (3), doubt (3), advice (3), important (3), comes (3), problem (3), every (3), could (3), hearts (3), unfamiliar (3), cambridge (2), january (2), february (2), june (2), 2007 (2), august (2), november (2), links (2), bridgebase (2), introduction (2), blogging (2), quite (2), back (2), after (2), starting (2), weeks (2), apart (2), game (2), clearly (2), again (2), start (2), also (2), involved (2), specifics (2), idea (2), seem (2), secondly (2), responsibility (2), end (2), thoughts (2), shouldn (2), either (2), authorities (2), interpretation (2), bother (2), organizations (2), case (2), totally (2), version (2), strongly (2), obvious (2), claiming (2), certain (2), around (2), remove (2), use (2), perhaps (2), conflict (2), appropriate (2), whatever (2), specific (2), defy (2), irrespective (2), similarly (2), thing (2), known (2), according (2), psyches (2), wording (2), number (2), finally (2), own (2), national (2), further (2), nigel (2), possibility (2), changing (2), making (2), suppose (2), anything (2), next (2), members (2), line (2), force (2), step (2), less (2), our (2), away (2), tell (2), minor (2), justification (2), wants (2), poor (2), non (2), needs (2), power (2), groups (2), committees (2), technically (2), overrule (2), though (2), won (2), ever (2), playing (2), set (2), variety (2), part (2), compared (2), applied (2), looking (2), closely (2), requirements (2), written (2), along (2), being (2), detailed (2), technical (2), analysis (2), become (2), required (2), cannot (2), assume (2), your (2), another (2), slogan (2), alerting (2), agree (2), natural (2), information (2), depend (2), asking (2), otherwise (2), description (2), conventions (2), disclosure (2), answering (2), defend (2), having (2), polish (2), moscito (2), little (2), latter (2), none (2), amount (2), unfamiliarity (2), play (2), opening (2), cue (2), firstpart (2), skip (2), complete, profile, united, kingdom, dbt, 2006, september, 2008, archive, rmb, bridgematters, beer, card, planet, bridgeblogging, blogs, daniel, page, siege, forums, including, iblf, online, original, focus, finished, subscribe, atom, home, older, apologise, seeing, optimistic, anyway, happened, moved, started, software, engineer, month, job, shock, tired, glad, gone, quickly, since, arrived, bbo, barely, concentrating, rectify, weekend, frequently, write, prioritized, processes, writing, interpreting, applying, worry, firstly, imagine, discussing, boring, rather, pretentious, producing, unfair, stick, already, product, calls, boiled, underneath, sad, discuss, sense, direction, each, building, ones, collection, week, saturday, continued, incidentally, creative, said, badly, critical, utterly, perverse, ignored, did, others, thought, legality, weapon, ways, address, sorted, refuses, thinks, effectively, adjudicate, dispute, cares, lightly, maybe, undermined, partly, reasonable, structure, overrides, read, without, mind, nowhere, lack, anybody, ridiculous, agreed, uphold, downright, faced, contradictory, allows, redealing, boards, bans, regulated, higher, controversy, 12c1, publications, significantly, altering, meaning, clear, uncontradictory, inevitably, form, hierarchy, decisions, binding, turn, control, tournaments, himself, organizers, sets, produces, ruling, needed, places, relevant, tabr2, argued, contradict, raises, usual, persuading, responsible, rarely, overriden, meeting, sound, satisfactory, surely, ought, cure, worse, disease, consider, alternatives, top, bottom, ultimate, deciding, passed, bring, immediately, per, example, requires, complaint, second, busy, round, fixing, alone, worrying, reasonably, pro, active, prefer, interfere, comply, adhering, condition, membership, threaten, withdraw, affiliation, masterpoints, getting, serious, pressure, walk, relatively, trivial, unlikely, practice, afford, meaningful, punish, actions, taken, passes, same, twist, worth, salt, supposed, existent, difference, itself, judge, almost, defintion, faith, problematic, final, explained, appeals, leaving, basically, concerns, didn, spell, struggles, decision, leads, feeling, entrenched, positions, easier, sometimes, misguided, consistency, deserve, usually, decided, produce, results, takes, properly, evaluate, demands, hearing, opinions, overruled, group, haven, consideration, world, greatest, believer, democracy, still, unelected, carry, function, specifically, wrote, prepared, fails, hear, tabr3, implications, details, disclose, methods, understand, correctly, standards, phrase, useful, piece, basis, alternative, definitions, nothing, backed, definition, examples, obviously, various, discussions, participated, cross, purposes, practical, irritating, such, principles, hedge, bets, working, undoubtedly, hardest, unsure, unclear, plan, ensures, help, opinion, guarantee, unless, definitive, somewhere, safest, helpful, policy, summarized, concentrate, nearly, arises, essentially, additional, attached, asks, give, dividing, lucky, covered, explicitly, comparing, situations, coming, sensible, whereas, err, side, caution, adequate, receiving, describe, partner, limitless, treatments, precise, result, common, described, realise, points, concerning, agreements, tabr4, invited, apparently, prompted, discussion, based, lines, under, spotlight, aren, hard, multi, assumed, fit, pre, empts, respectively, react, lot, myself, considerably, intimidating, suspect, big, affected, chances, meanings, taxing, individually, unusual, times, intimidation, factor, correlated, frequency, former, restricting, once, session, challenge, appearing, hand, unlucky, starts, draining, although, face, kind, dimmed, nebulous, suit, across, completely, rational, reasons, disliking, course, detracts, enjoyment, besides, theorist, showing, straight, long, managed, double, agreement, pick, remarkable, used, analogies, grasp, comfortable, sleep, continue, permitted, fact, experiences, probably, mistake, allow, great, learn, love, large, majority, allowed, suggested, easily, dismissed, appears, complaints, 1nt, strong, balanced, spades, geocities, closed, couple, months, ago, lazy, copy, referred, please, email, yahoo, dcrc2y, sidebar,

Text of the page (random words):
re exactly what you can expect from it the best way to find out is to ask the acbl has another slogan for this ask do not assume but for the td there are no such nice general principles a td cannot hedge his bets he must rule one way or the other that comes down to working out exactly what the regulations mean the td s question is undoubtedly the hardest of the three what s the point of all this there are three things i want to say here first of all when someone does ask one of these questions it s obviously important to know which point of view they are thinking of from the various discussions i ve participated in it seems to me that it s all too easy to talk at cross purposes you can be trying to decide how a td should rule and then someone comes along and says if you re not sure just alert it what s the problem or just as bad a player who wants practical advice can end up being given a detailed technical analysis this sort of thing can become very irritating you really have to make sure you know which of the three answers is required secondly the phrase when in doubt alert is certainly a useful piece of advice for players but it is not and never can be the basis for a regulation it is not something that can be applied by the td a td has no alternative to looking closely at the definitions to see what the requirements really are and i know that when in doubt alert is written into the acbl regulations but it would mean nothing if it was not backed up by a proper definition and examples of what actually makes a call alertable finally i believe there are implications for what makes a good regulation players do not necessarily need to know all the details of the regulations in order to disclose their methods and understand opponents correctly we may have different standards for the regulations that players do need to know compared to those that will only ever be applied by tds more on this to come posted by davidc at 15 28 2 comments labels regs tabr sunday 26 july 2009 tabr3 who makes the rules part 2 in the previous post i argued that a td should follow the regulations of his club or tournament or nbo even if they contradict the laws of bridge that raises the question as put by nigel k in a comment to that post if a regulation is illegal what can be done about it one possibility is to go through the usual process for changing a regulation that means persuading the committee responsible for the regulation that they should change it very rarely a committee might be overriden by a general meeting or something like that but that doesn t sound very satisfactory surely if a regulation is illegal it ought to be possible to require it to be put right well personally i don t think it s possible or if it is possible i think the cure would be worse than the disease let s consider the alternatives as mentioned in the previous post there is a sort of chain of authority for making regulations with the wbf at the top and tds at the bottom so let s suppose that we have a club which has made an illegal regulation now the wbf is the ultimate authority for deciding what is or is not legal but there is no direct link between the wbf and an individual club so the wbf can t do anything about it so authority is passed down to the next link in the chain the national organization there is a link between a club and its nbo clubs are members of the nbo so in principle at least a nbo can require a club to bring its regulations into line with the laws in a similar way everyone answers to the organization immediately above them in the chain tds work for their clubs as per my previous post and nbos answer to the wbf well that s the principle is it going to work in order to force a club s regulation to be changed for example three things will have to happen the nbo has to hear about it the nbo has to have the time to tell the club that they should change what they are doing the nbo has to be prepared to follow it through and take action if the club fails to put things right the first of these things doesn t happen very often it requires someone to care enough about the situation to make a complaint the second step is even less likely nbos are very busy and most of them don t even get round to fixing their own rules let alone worrying about what their clubs might be doing even in a reasonably pro active nbo like our ebu i m sure they would prefer not to have to interfere then we get to the last step what can an nbo actually do to force a club to comply most likely adhering to the laws is a condition of membership so they can threaten to withdraw affiliation or masterpoints from the members point of view but now that s getting pretty serious and the nbo doesn t want to lose a club if too much pressure is put on them then they will just walk away the nbo really doesn t want to take action over what is a relatively trivial matter so it is very very unlikely that this will happen one level further up it s even less likely if a nbo has an illegal regulation then the wbf can in theory tell them to change but in practice the wbf can t afford to lose an nbo indeed there s no way they can take any meaningful action against them at all over something as minor as this you can t punish the players for actions taken by a committee and so the authority passes down to the next link in the chain you know what that means it means that the people who get to decide whether the regulations are illegal are the same people who wrote the regulations now you know how easy it is to twist the wording of the laws to make them say pretty much anything you want any regulating authority worth its salt will be able to come up with some justification for the rules it wants to make and you may think that this supposed justification is poor to non existent but it makes no difference because the regulating authority itself is the judge particularly for an nbo if they say their regulations are legal then they are legal almost by defintion now personally i have more faith in my nbo than i do in the wbf so this doesn t particularly bother me but if you feel there is something that needs to be changed clearly this situation is problematic the final possibility is to use whatever power you have to defy the regulating authority i explained in my last post why i feel the td should not do this but similar arguments apply to other groups nigel mentioned appeals committees technically an ac doesn t have the authority to overrule a td on a matter of law but even leaving that aside i think it would be a bad idea basically i have three concerns these all apply to tds as well though i didn t really spell them out in my last post not the right time and place regulations are usually decided in elected committees this may not always produce the best results but it s the best process we have in particular it takes time to properly evaluate a regulation and it really demands hearing a variety of opinions if a committee has been through this process and has come up with a regulation they really shouldn t be overruled by a different group who haven t had the time for proper consideration and though i m not the world s greatest believer in democracy i still don t think it s right to have an unelected committee thinking they can overrule an elected one particularly if when we re talking about nbo regulations a committee was elected to carry out specifically this function consistency players really deserve to know before they start playing what the regulations are if you set aside a regulation then you are changing the rules power struggles it s not good to have two groups both thinking they have the right to make a particular decision the poor players and tds won t know who to believe and it leads to bad feeling and ever more entrenched positions it s much easier to change things for the better when there is only one committee involved even if they are sometimes misguided posted by davidc at 14 26 1 comment labels regs tabr sunday 19 july 2009 tabr2 who makes the rules when a ruling is needed there are at least four different places the relevant rules might come from the wbf produces the laws of bridge national bridge organizations have further sets of regulations individual clubs or tournament organizers may have their own regulations finally the td may have to decide some things for himself these form a nice hierarchy decisions made by the wbf are binding on the nbos nbos in turn have some control over their clubs and tournaments and tds should follow the rules they have been given this is all well and good when the rules are clear and uncontradictory but inevitably that isn t always the case there are a number of things that can go wrong and this post is about just one of those things it has been known for authorities to make regulations which are illegal according to the laws of bridge you might see a club rule that allows redealing of boards or bans psyches some psyches can be regulated according to the laws but not all higher up the chain there has been a bit of controversy recently because the acbl has changed the wording of law 12c1 e in its publications significantly altering the meaning from the wbf s version so the td can be faced with a law that says one thing and a regulation which says something different and contradictory what is he to do in my view a td s responsibility is to his club or tournament if you have agreed to direct at a club then you must uphold that club s regulations irrespective of whether they are good bad or downright illegal similarly if there is conflict between a nbo and the wbf a td should always follow the regulations of his nbo why should this be so partly because it s the only reasonable way to structure these things a more specific regulation always overrides a general one indeed if you try to read the laws of bridge without this principle in mind you will get nowhere i would also point to the lack of a direct link between a td and his nbo a nbo can require that its clubs follow certain rules but it has no say over who they ask to direct so a td does not have to answer to anybody apart from his club that makes it pretty ridiculous to defy the club s regulations but perhaps the main point is that there are much better ways to address any conflict in the regulations these things should be sorted out at the appropriate level and at the appropriate time if a td refuses to apply a regulation which he thinks is illegal then he is effectively claiming that he has the right to adjudicate in a dispute between his club and his nbo or nbo and wbf or whatever no it is not his place to do that if a bridge organization cares enough about something to make a regulation particularly one that might be illegal then they will not have done so lightly it means they believe that is what is best for their players maybe they are wrong but they have a right to expect that they will not be undermined by their tds now this all seems pretty obvious to me but i ve seen too many people claiming that certain regulations are illegal and that this means those regulations can be ignored too often it is a way to try to get around a regulation that people don t like i don t think this is a proper way to go about things if you don t like a regulation then you should try to get it changed indeed the ebu recently did remove a regulation which i and many others thought was illegal the main reason to remove it was that it was a bad regulation but the question over its legality was a good weapon to use against it incidentally what do we feel about authorities who make these illegal regulations or regulations that are only legal with a very creative interpretation of the laws personally it doesn t really bother me that much as i said above organizations are just trying to do what is best for their players if they think the laws are so badly wrong that they have to make an illegal regulation then they must feel pretty strongly that that is what is best for their players i find it difficult to be too critical of that and certainly in the case of law 12 mentioned above i think the acbl is totally right about what the law should say as the wbf s version is utterly perverse to be continued posted by davidc at 09 03 6 comments labels regs tabr saturday 18 july 2009 thoughts about bridge regulations introduction this is the start of a series of posts about bridge laws and regulations this series is about what makes a good regulation what should be prioritized and what should not be it s also about the processes involved in writing interpreting and applying these regulations that is i m going to be talking about general philosophy not about the specifics of what individual regulations mean now i always worry when talking about this stuff firstly do people really care i imagine that to most people the idea of discussing this sort of philosophy would seem very boring if not rather pretentious and secondly i ve never had to take responsibility for producing regulations so it s easy for me to talk and a bit unfair on the people who actually have to do it they get enough stick already but people really do care about the end product they care about which systems are legal and which calls have to be alerted we see more than enough arguments about these things and often those arguments can be boiled down to a question of philosophy i think at some point we have to put aside the specifics and talk about what s going on underneath and sad as it may seem i find this stuff interesting so here is a place to discuss that philosophy i should point out that this series is going to be a bit different to my series on bidding theory that had a nice sense of direction to it with each post building on the ones before this new series is just a collection of thoughts in no particular order and you shouldn t expect two posts a week either posted by davidc at 21 00 2 comments labels regs tabr what s up i have to apologise again for not blogging recently particularly seeing as i was quite optimistic last time that i might get back into it anyway what s happened is that i ve moved back to cambridge and started work as a software engineer i ve been here for a month now after all this time starting a proper job has been a bit of a shock to the system i was so tired after work for the first two weeks but i m very glad to be here and the weeks have gone by very quickly and i ve played no bridge at all since i arrived apart from one game on bbo where i was barely concentrating which is clearly something i will need to rectify there are two posts to come this weekend i m not going to be blogging very frequently but it s nice to be able to write here when there is something to say posted by davidc at 19 55 1 comment older posts home subscribe to posts atom bidding theory the original focus of this blog was a series of posts on general bidding theory which i finished in march 2007 you can view this here introduction all posts links bridgebase ...