[matmat]

is there any part of the laws of the game that entrust the director with providing a quiet/distraction free environment?

[gwnn]

no

[Elianna]

I haven't found anything directly on point, but:

Quote

Law 90B: Offenses Subject to Penalty
        3. discussion on the bidding, play or result of a board, which may be overheard at another table.

This seems to imply that the director is responsible for preventing this.

Quote

Law 82A: Director's Duty
      It is the duty of the Director to rectify errors of procedure and to maintain the progress of the game in a manner that is not contrary to these laws

Mainly, I think that the answer to your question (though I'm not definitely sure) is that this is not a responsibility in the laws, but one assigned by the bridge club in question on the director. When I was directing, it was definitely told to me that maintaining order, discipline, and quite was my number one priority.

[blackshoe]

Provision of an appropriate venue is the responsibility of the Sponsoring Organization, not the TD. Law 80B. The TD has a responsibility to "ensure the orderly progress of the game" - Law 81C4. So a lot depends on what you mean by "distraction".

[jtfanclub]

matmat, on Jan 29 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

is there any part of the laws of the game that entrust the director with providing a quiet/distraction free environment?

That question doesn't make any sense to me. There's nothing keeping a district from having a rated bridge game in the middle of Ho-Chunk Casino between the slot machines and the roulette table. What's the TD supposed to do? Show up with a shotgun?

For Addicts, I don't like the level of chat myself but it's not up to me. Unless it's bridge-related or patently offensive I'm not going to turn it off.

[matmat]

jtfanclub, on Jan 30 2008, 12:27 PM, said:

matmat, on Jan 29 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

is there any part of the laws of the game that entrust the director with providing a quiet/distraction free environment?

That question doesn't make any sense to me. There's nothing keeping a district from having a rated bridge game in the middle of Ho-Chunk Casino between the slot machines and the roulette table. What's the TD supposed to do? Show up with a shotgun?

For Addicts, I don't like the level of chat myself but it's not up to me. Unless it's bridge-related or patently offensive I'm not going to turn it off.

let's put it this way;
i was kibbing a tournament online. The TD (also the organizer) felt it was necessary to flood the tournament chat with lots and lots of comments,remarks,suggestions,rules and little geometrical shapes made up of .♣♦♥♠.

This in and of itself is harmless, however, when players are trying to talk to their opps to clarify a bid or carding or whatever, sometimes questions get lost in the fluff, other times the answers do. it just seems like it would be annoying, don't you think?

[cherdano]

matmat, on Jan 30 2008, 02:47 PM, said:

jtfanclub, on Jan 30 2008, 12:27 PM, said:

matmat, on Jan 29 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

is there any part of the laws of the game that entrust the director with providing a quiet/distraction free environment?

That question doesn't make any sense to me. There's nothing keeping a district from having a rated bridge game in the middle of Ho-Chunk Casino between the slot machines and the roulette table. What's the TD supposed to do? Show up with a shotgun?

For Addicts, I don't like the level of chat myself but it's not up to me. Unless it's bridge-related or patently offensive I'm not going to turn it off.

let's put it this way;
i was kibbing a tournament online. The TD (also the organizer) felt it was necessary to flood the tournament chat with lots and lots of comments,remarks,suggestions,rules and little geometrical shapes made up of .♣♦♥♠.

This in and of itself is harmless, however, when players are trying to talk to their opps to clarify a bid or carding or whatever, sometimes questions get lost in the fluff, other times the answers do. it just seems like it would be annoying, don't you think?

I agree, that's one of the reasons I don't play these tournaments...

[jtfanclub]

matmat, on Jan 30 2008, 03:47 PM, said:

let's put it this way;
i was kibbing a tournament online. The TD (also the organizer) felt it was necessary to flood the tournament chat with lots and lots of comments,remarks,suggestions,rules and little geometrical shapes made up of .♣♦♥♠.

This in and of itself is harmless, however, when players are trying to talk to their opps to clarify a bid or carding or whatever, sometimes questions get lost in the fluff, other times the answers do. it just seems like it would be annoying, don't you think?

Sure. I direct Addicts games which, if they aren't the worst, are pretty close to it.

The organizer insists on it, and the players seem to like it (those that still play our games on a regular basis, that is). I don't like it myself, but I (as one of several TDs on the nights I direct) don't really have a say here. It's like demanding English Only, or what systems are allowed, or whether you have to announce system and carding at the start of each round. It's up to the organizer, not the TD.

Does the organizer have the responsibility? I don't think so. You can certainly have games where you can get advice from other players, or discuss defenses when they come up, etc. I wouldn't call it competitive bridge any more, but we're not talking about ACBL/EBU tourneys here.

Does the organizer have to tell people advance that this will be a chatty tourney? I don't know the answer to that one, but there's lots of things that IMO should be required to be announced prior to the start of a tourney (English Only being a big one, GCC/No Multi or Polish Club being another) that people do not announce for tourneys in BBO. So even if this should be required to be announced in advance, there are more serious cases that I'd like to see addressed first.

[jillybean]

cherdano, on Jan 30 2008, 02:18 PM, said:

I agree, that's one of the reasons I don't play these tournaments...

Come & play in one of my tourneys, I run games where there is no noise and psyches are allowed.

[jillybean]

jtfanclub, on Jan 30 2008, 02:24 PM, said:

The organizer insists on it, and the players seem to like it (those that still play our games on a regular basis, that is).  I don't like it myself, but I (as one of several TDs on the nights I direct) don't really have a say here.

Of course you have say in it, your feet do the talking.

[Codo]

matmat, on Jan 31 2008, 05:47 AM, said:

let's put it this way;
i was kibbing a tournament online. The TD (also the organizer) felt it was necessary to flood the tournament chat with lots and lots of comments,remarks,suggestions,rules and little geometrical shapes made up of .♣♦♥♠.

Doesn´t mark as enemy and ignore chat work if this guy is a TD?

[matmat]

Codo, on Jan 31 2008, 03:56 AM, said:

Doesn´t mark as enemy and ignore chat work if this guy is a TD?

I am sure it does, but it strikes me it might be the most prudent of actions when playing in their tournament.

[pclayton]

The spam is pretty irritating, but Ive learned to ignore it