Spade Heart  Diamond Club
Stirling and Union Bridge Club
 
Recent Updates
Home Page
9th Oct 2016 12:44 BST
display_page18
23rd Aug 2016 17:39 BST
display_page16
17th Jun 2016 15:00 BST
display_page15
17th May 2016 00:19 BST
 
Pages viewed in 2016
 
News & Items of Interest
This page has information and news of interest to the members. For a full list of forthcoming events, see "Calendar" on the menu and for a list of results see "Results".
 
 
  Feedback
FORM
Last updated : 19th Jul 2011 09:21 BST
  Bridge Proprieties

Bridge Proprieties

 

An accepted code of bridge etiquette and bridge ethics has come together over the decades in which the game has been played.

There are penalties for a breach of ethics [Laws 73 and 74], but the game is most enjoyable if everyone looks after his or her own ethics.

Intentiona lviolations of bridge proprieties are dishonest and subject to penalty, but also important are the minor breaches that destroy the social nature of the game.

 

 Always maintain a courteous attitude to everyone, partner, opponents, tournament director, and teammates.

 

 Do not express displeasure or satisfaction, by word or gesture, at a lead, play, bid, doubleor any other call partner makes.

 

 Always make sure that any conventional bids used by you and your partner are alerted and clearly and fully explained to the opponents when questioned. Make sure your convention card is correctly filled in, legible and available to your opponents.

 

 Do not look to see the place in the hand from which another player pulls a card in playing, nor draw inferences from them.

 

 Always make bids and plays in tempo -- without special emphasis or method of playing the bidding cards that would give partner information on the nature of your hand.

 

 Do not detach acard from your hand before it is your turn to play or indicate the expectation of winning or losing a trick that has not been completed.

                                                                

 

 Always make up your mind before reaching for the bidding box. Touching more than one card before final selection risks conveying ‘unauthorised information’ to your partner.

 

 Do not draw anyinference from the fact that partner has hesitated, or has bid with any special emphasis. This is usually classed as ‘unauthorised information’

 

 Always make sure that you use the Stop card before making jump bids, and that you pause at least the recommended time after a jump bid, while looking interested. Use the time to decide on your actions. Counting the seconds or looking bored while after a jump bid is a breach of ethics.

 

 Do not hesitate, either in the bidding or in the play, in order to deceive the opponents. For example, when you have nothing to bid or, in play, when you have a singleton in the suit played, or not having the Ace when a card is led towards a King high suit on table.

 

 Always claim tospeed up the play if you are certain that all the tricks are yours and there is no doubt whatsoever as to how many tricks each side is going to make.

 

 Do not prepare to lead to a trick before the previous trick is completed. Do not play early.

 

 Always call the director at the first sign of an irregularity. This is not offensive in any way and avoids arguments or discussion. Never make your own rulings.

 

 Be Helpful and Accommodate young and inexperienced players who may not be familiar with all the rules and ethics of the game. A gentle approach to their indiscretions will improve their knowledge and enjoyment of the game.

Last updated : 4th Nov 2011 11:04 GMT
  Members Section

A members section has now been added which contains information not available to the general public.

There are 3 main features.

Message page which allows members to enter and view messages eg "I am looking for a partner" or "anyone wanting to play in the Fakirk League?" etc

A Notice page for members only. The minute of the 2008 AGM is included in the Members Only Notice Page.

A List of Members page showing information only to other club members eg Name, email address, tel no.

The more members who use this the better it will serve all members.

If you wish access to this section contact Ivan Condon who will give you an initial password which allows access and then you can set your own password for future access.

Last updated : 30th Nov 2014 11:04 GMT
  Alerting Procedures

Scottish Bridge Union Alerting Procedures

 

From 1 September 2007 the Scottish Bridge Union have adopted the WBF policy on Alerting, which is:

 

“The following classes of calls should be alerted:

1   Conventional bids should be alerted, non-conventional bids should not.

2   Those bids which have special meanings or which are based on or lead to special understandings between the partners.
(A player may not make a call or play based on a special partnership understanding unless an opposing pair may reasonably be expected to understand its meaning, or unless his side discloses the use of such call or play in accordance with the regulations of the sponsoring organization). See Law 40(b).

3   Non-forcing jump changes of suit responses to opening bids or overcalls, and non-forcing new suit responses by an unpassed hand to opening bids of one of a suit.

 

Do NOT alert the following:

1   All doubles.

2   Any no-trump bid which suggests a balanced or semi-balanced hand, or suggests a no-trump contract.

3   Any call at the four level or higher, with the exception of conventional calls on the first round of the auction.

Nevertheless, players must respect the spirit of the Policy as well as the letter.”

 

You should not alert

·         natural weak two openers

·         natural jump overcalls, whether they are weak, intermediate or strong

·         any opening 1NT, no matter what the range, unless there is an agreement that it may be unbalanced

·         any no-trump bid, no matter how weak or strong, that suggests playing in no-trumps
(thus a 2NT response showing 16+HCP in a balanced hand is not alerted;  a 2NT response that may be unbalanced, or promises 4-card support is alerted)

·         any conventional call at the four-level or higher (including ace-asking bids, cue-bids, splinter bids and forcing passes), unless it occurs on the first round of the auction

·         any double, no matter what it means

You should alert

·         all conventional bids at the four-level or higher that occur on the first round of the auction, including

South African Texas openings of 4♣ or 4♦ that show hearts or spades respectively

cue-bids or splinter bids in response to an opening bid

two-suited overcalls such as (2♠) 4♣  showing clubs and hearts

·         all conventional bids at or below 3NT, including

simple Stayman (including the 2♦ rebid denying a major)

transfers over 1NT and 2NT (but do not alert the completion of the transfer)

two-suited two-level openers or overcalls

fit jumps, showing the suit bid plus support for partner’s suit

·         jump change of suit responses to an opening bid or overcall that are natural but non-forcing, in particular weak jump shifts 

 

You should also alert all 1NT, 2NT and 3NT bids that do not simply suggest playing in no-trumps, including

·         a forcing 1NT response to an opening one of a suit

·         a 2NT inquiry after a weak two opening

·         unusual 2NT showing two suits

·         Lebensohl 2NT asking partner to bid 3♣

·         scrambling 2NT showing two places to play     

These changes mean that it is more important than ever to draw your opponents’ attention to unusual aspects of your methods.  At the beginning of a round or match, you should inform your opponents of your basic system, no-trump range, the meaning of your two-level openers and any unusual aspects of your methods, in particular any unusual uses of doubles.

The SBU considers this to be good practice, but wishes each partnership also to provide Convention Cards to exchange with opponents. A standard Convention Card may be downloaded from the Home page of the SBU website www.scottishbridge.co.uk

(If you are playing a simple system in your club it will be sufficient to fill out the basic convention card on the front of your scorecard.)

 

Remember the spirit of the WBF policy: to ensure that opponents are not disadvantaged by ignorance of your agreements.

The new policy may be difficult to remember at first, but please do not panic: allowances will be made. 

 

If you have any questions, or comments, pleased direct them to the Chairman of the Laws and Ethics Committee, Liz McGowan (liz@sbueast.org.uk)

Last updated : 19th Jul 2011 09:25 BST
  Changes in the Laws 2008

SCOTTISH BRIDGE UNION

Summary of Changes in the Laws: 2008

As from 1 September 2008, the latest version of the Laws of Duplicate Bridge will be implemented in Scotland

A complete file of the new Laws can be downloaded from the WBF website, www.worldbridge.org; or from www.ecatsbridge.com. We hope to produce a printed version soon. Most of the changes are aimed at clarification rather than alteration: we list below the changes that are most likely to affect you, the players.

Law 7 Control of Boards and Cards.

The Laws require you to count your cards face down after removing them from the board or wallet. You should count them again, and are now also required to shuffle your cards, before returning them to the board.

Law 17 The Auction Period

The auction period begins for a partnership when either partner withdraws his cards from the board (previously this was defined as 'when either player looks at his cards'.) Once the auction period begins you may no longer consult your own convention card, or any other form of aide memoire, until the auction is completed.

Law 20 Review and Explanation of Calls

You may ask questions about the bidding at your turn to call or play. When your partner asks you are now specifically forbidden from asking supplementary questions until it is your turn to call or play. Where previously you could ask only for a full explanation of the auction, you may now ask questions about a specific call during the auction and throughout the play. Try to avoid questions that might be construed as drawing attention to a specific suit: you may be accused of offering unauthorised information to your partner.

Note the basic requirement to ensure that opponents are fully informed about your methods.

Law 21 Call based on Misinformation

When the explanation of a bid does not conform to the actual hand the director must now presume that the explanation was wrong unless there is evidence to the contrary - a good reason to carry convention cards!

Law 25 Legal and Illegal Changes of Call.

Calls are now defined as 'intended' and 'unintended' rather than 'inadvertent'. If you make an ‘unintended’ call (eg by pulling the wrong bid from your box) you may correct it ‘without pause for thought’. If you notice your error after a pause, call the TD. If you change an unintended call after LHO has made a call he too may change his call. You may not change an unintended call after your partner has bid, or if the auction is finished. If you wish to change a call because you have changed your mind then your first call is an ‘intended’ call. You are advised to summon a TD. Your LHO can accept a substitute call, but not after he has made a call.

Law 27 Insufficient Bid

As before, an insufficient bid can be replaced with the lowest sufficient bid in the same denomination provided both the insufficient bid and the replacement are incontrovertibly not artificial. A change is that if the insufficient bid (artificial or not) is replaced with any legal call that has the same meaning as, or a more precise meaning than, the insufficient bid, the auction proceeds without further rectification. Eg, an inadvertent 4D response to Blackwood can be converted to 5D without rectification. Always ask the TD to rule on this thorny issue! Even after allowing a change he may award an adjusted score at the end of play if he later decides that the outcome of the hand might have been different without the assistance of the insufficient bid. Replacing an insufficient bid with a call that does not satisfy either of the above conditions still silences partner for the rest of the auction. Left-hand opponent may accept an insufficient bid, even when it has been replaced before a director has ruled. Should an insufficient bid be replaced with another insufficient bid the new Laws lose patience: LHO may accept the substituted insufficient bid, otherwise it must be replaced by a legal bid or pass, and partner is silenced for the rest of the auction.

 

Law 40 Partnership Understandings.

These are defined as 'methods adopted explicitly in discussion and implicitly through experience.' It is incumbent on you to ensure that opponents are not damaged through ignorance of your methods. You do this by alerting correctly and giving full explanations of your understandings. (See ‘Alerting Procedures’ under ‘Support: Resources’ on the SBU website: www.scottishbridge.co.uk )

Law 61 Failure to Follow Suit - Inquiries Concerning a Revoke

During the play declarer may ask a defender who has failed to follow suit whether he has a card of that suit; either defender may similarly ask declarer, and now a defender may ask his partner. The defenders risk a claim of creating unauthorised information if they ask one another. Dummy may ask declarer whether he has failed to follow suit - one of the few things dummy is allowed to do.

Law 64 Procedure after Establishment of a Revoke

When a revoke is established, and the offending side wins that, or a subsequent trick, one trick is transferred to the non-offending side. A major change is that two tricks are transferred only when the trick is won by the revoke card itself. There is also a new provision that if both sides revoke on the same deal, not necessarily on the same trick, there is no transfer of tricks. The Director retains the power to adjust the score if the non-offending side is insufficiently compensated by the trick transfer.

Law 65 Arrangement of Tricks

This is a new provision: declarer may require that a card that is incorrectly pointed should be corrected at any point during the play. Dummy or either defender may also draw attention to an incorrectly pointed card, but only until the lead is made to the following trick; if done later Law 16B (unauthorised information) may apply.

Law 67 Defective Trick

If a player fails to follow suit to a trick, and later discovers that he has more cards than the other players, he may place a card of the suit led, failing which any card of his choice, among his played cards. He is deemed to have revoked, with a one trick transfer if possible.

Law 68 Claim or Concession of Tricks

There is some clarification of the position when one defender concedes one or more tricks, and his partner immediately objects. Play continues, and any of defender’s cards which have been exposed is not a penalty card, but partner may not use the information available from seeing such cards.

Law 70 Contested Claim or Concession.

Play should cease after a claim or concession, but any play occurring after a claim may be used by the director as evidence of the players intentions, and the accuracy of the claim.

Law 75 Mistaken Explanation of Mistaken Call

Rewording: If a call is misexplained: a player should report his own mistaken explanation immediately. Declarer or dummy should correct partner’s error before the opening lead is made. A defender must wait till the end of play before correcting partner’s mistake – there may be an adjusted score.

A mistaken call does not attract an adjusted score, but a mistaken explanation is to be assumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary (See Law 21)

Law 76 Spectators

Spectators in a playing area are now under the control of the director. There are some new regulations to take account of new scoring technology and electronic transmission of play.

Laws 79; 85; 86 Director’s Powers

Changes here give directors additional powers. Law 75 allows him to correct a scoring error after expiry of the official correction period, provided he is satisfied that the record is wrong.

Law 85 advises that he may rule on disputed facts based on the balance of probabilities in accordance with the evidence he is able to collect Law 86 allows a director to award an assigned score in a teams match when an adjusted score has been given at one table, but the non-offending side at the other table obtained a favourable result

Last updated : 19th Jul 2011 09:24 BST
  Bridgemate

Bridgemate equipment and software is now being used progressively for club competitions.  The big advantages are:

  • Results for Matchpoints events available immediately after play
  • Accurate scoring for all pairs events [assuming scores are entered correctly!]
  • Uploading results onto the website immediately after play
  • Reduced workload on Tournament Directors scoring Matchpoints and checking Aggregate and Team events

We now have a group of competent Scorers who can use Scorebridge and the Bridgemate system.

For more information about the Bridgemate system click on the title Bridgemate.

Accredited Bridgemate Scorers:

Moira Bain

Jim Brown - Tel 01786 823665

Ivan Condon - Tel 01877 331389

Tom Gourlay - Tel 01786 450915

Sylvia Mackenzie

Iain Taylor - 01786 469367

Pat Wilson


Last updated : 4th Nov 2011 11:07 GMT
  World Senior Pairs in Bali

 

Article for Stirling Bridge Club

 

Scotland at the World Championships

 

For the first time ever, Scotland had qualified to take part in a World Championship event.  The Senior Team had won a prestigious Bronze Medal at the European Championships in Dublin in 2012, thus earning the right to be one of the teams from Europe to go forward to the World Championships. 

 

The 2013 World Championships were held in beautiful, exotic Bali, Indonesia, from 16th to 29th September 2013.  As usual, the three World Championship events were held simultaneously:

 

·         The Bermuda Bowl for Open Teams;

·         The Venice Cup for Ladies Teams;

·         The D’Orsi Bowl for Senior Teams.

 

There were 22 teams in each event, with teams qualifying from each of the eight zones of the World Bridge Federation.   In total, 32 countries were represented, Bahrain being the only other country for which it was a first appearance. 

 

The three Championships were run on identical formats.  This consisted of a full round-robin of 16-board matches over 7 days with the top eight qualifying for the knockout stage.  In this stage, each of the matches in the quarter-final, semi-final and final were of 96 boards, played in 16-board segments over 2 days.

 

The Selection Committee decided to select the team that had won the European Bronze Medal:

 

·         Willie Coyle & John Matheson

·         Derek Diamond & Victor Silverstone

·         John Murdoch & Iain Sime

·         NPC: Harry Smith

·         Coach: Trish Matheson

 

Unfortunately, John Matheson, who had been a mainstay of our team in Dublin, decided that the journey would be too onerous in his current state of health, and that he would have to drop out.  This also meant that we also had to lose his wife, Trish.

 

Following a Trial, Willie Coyle qualified to rejoin the team, this time with Gerald Haase as his partner.  It became clear, however, that a different line-up would suit the team better, with Victor Silverstone partnering Willie Coyle and Gerald Haase partnering Derek Diamond.  I presented this proposal to the Selection Committee and it was agreed.  In addition, it was agreed that we would not fund a coach but would instead appoint one of the bridge-playing wives who would be travelling with us as coach to assist me when required.  Derek’s wife, Rhona, was appointed. 

 

Thus the full team was now:

 

·         Willie Coyle & Victor Silverstone

·         Derek Diamond & Gerald Haase

·         John Murdoch & Iain Sime

·         NPC: Harry Smith

·         Coach: Rhona Diamond

 

Scotland had been playing in European Championships as a separate country since 2000, but prior to 2012, the best performance of the Senior Team in the European Championships was in Warsaw in 2006 when we came 8th, and that was the best result of any Scottish team in European Championships.  The country had been used to low expectations and the success in 2012 was an exciting surprise.

 

However, having seen the team play in Dublin, I was confident the result was fully deserved, and that, if the team could continue to play as well as it had done there, then it could be a force to be reckoned with in Bali. 

 

My target, therefore, was for the team to qualify from the round-robin by coming in the top eight.  We would need to play very well, but I felt it was achievable.  Beyond that would depend on who we played, how tired we became, and how we coped with the extreme pressure.

 

We arrived on 13th September, which gave us 4 nights and 3 full days before the actual play began.  It was important that the six players should rest, adapt to the 7-hour time difference, and get used to the temperatures, which were somewhat higher than they were used to at home!

 

In an event such as this, it is very unlikely that any team will win all its matches.  What is important is to play a tight game, taking advantage of opportunities presented, and ensuring that, if the opposition do perform well, any loss is limited.   We won 15 out of the 21 matches.  Of the 6 losses, 4 were kept as small losses giving us 6 VPs or more.  Only 2 matches were major losses.  Frustratingly, these were the only two matches where Scotland featured on BBO: match 15 against The Netherlands, and match 16 against USA2!

 

However, the team had succeeded in its first objective; we had qualified for the knock-out stage in 7th place!  We were over the moon.  For Scotland to achieve this at its first ever World Championship was an amazing achievement.

 

We were very unfortunate in the draw for the quarter-final.  We met a team of American professionals, and, as this was one of the few teams we had lost badly to in the round-robin, they had the maximum carry-over of 16 imps against us.

This was a match where everything went wrong:

 

·         All three pairs played poorly.

·         All luck seemed to go the American way.

·         The relatively weak sponsor had very few decisions to make or hands to play.

 

Despite that, we took a large number of imps off them, almost as many as some of the winning teams in the other matches.  However, imps were thrown away on other boards, and the result, sadly, was a convincing loss.

 

A subsidiary event had been running from the end of the Round-Robin stage.  The Trans-National Teams was open to all teams knocked out of the three main events, or indeed to teams formed out of parts of these teams.  In addition, more than 50 other teams had come to Bali solely to play in this event.  The team wanted to continue as an entity so we entered this event, now in its third day.

 

The format was a Swiss Teams for 15 rounds with the top eight qualifying for knock-out rounds.  We entered on a score of 12 VPs for each of the ten matches we had missed. 

 

We received a very tough series of draws.  We started with a Chinese team that was in the lead by almost a full clear match, had won all 10 of their previous matches, and did eventually end up winners of the Swiss part of the event.  We beat them by 7 imps.  We then had to play what was effectively a mixture of the Brazilian Open and Senior Teams, we won by 27 imps, and were now lying 9th.

 

Next came a young but very strong Polish team, which itself only went out in the quarter-finals by a small margin to the eventual winners.  We lost by 12 imps, and had dropped to 10th place.  We were now drawn against the eventual winners, another team of American professionals!  In a close match, we lost by 8 imps, which effectively ended our chances.

 

Dejected, we now had to face the Chinese Open Team, and we lost this by 18 imps, a disappointing end to our event, but it’s hard to keep going once you have been knocked out of the main event, and then are faced with an almost impossible task in the secondary event.  Interestingly, we had performed very well relative to most of the teams that had come from the main events.

 

I felt that, with the interest our qualification had generated and the generous response to our fund-raising efforts, it was very important that people at home should be kept informed and be able to feel involved.  I therefore arranged for a special website to be created, through which I could communicate with the SBU membership.

 

In all I posted 86 photos, and submitted 32 reports, which, excluding the hand records, came to about 20,000 words.  1,430 unique visitors accessed the site with a total of 79,307 hits.

 

Overall, our fund-raising came to over £10,000, and the team would like to thank Stirling Bridge Club, and all the other clubs and members of the SBU for the generous contributions made.

 

I feel we achieved a lot.  For a first appearance at a World Championships, we performed well.  Both by our results and our whole approach to the event, we are confident we were a credit to Scottish bridge.

 

Harry Smith

27th October 2013.

 

Last updated : 31st Oct 2013 16:10 GMT