GOING TO HELL IN A HAND BASKET (Part I)

The above entitled cliché has been heard recently, especially regarding the current stock market debacle. It can be interpreted in a multitude of ways by different interest groups but basically alludes to rapid deterioration – easily and without hope.

Unfortunately, age has its own rewards – giving this writer fertile grounds for comparison. Reflecting upon the bridge panorama over the last five decades, the decay is apparent to me in varying degrees — encompassing the entire hobby. However, the contentment and status quo by those now at the helm seem to be in favor of gaining momentum and not looking back.

How do I disagree? Let me count the ways.

It seems reasonable to start at the club level where most bridge players get their feet wet. The general aura, which I have perceived from a personal vantage point, is for management to make their paying guests comfortable, happy and create a burning desire to return again and again, supporting and paying allegiance to their newfound home. That is certainly not out of line and a wonderful way to encourage the future of the game.

However – many (and certainly not all) directors and club owners deliberately place other considerations on the back burner. What, you ask? Bridge is (or should be) a game of sanctity and honor. What does that mean? Each player (at the get-go) should be taught manners and ethics (but probably in the reverse order). In the manners department, the deportment of many individuals were so out of line that Zero Tolerance became a mandatory regulation at all levels of the game. What is Zero Tolerance? It is treating both your partner and opponents with respect, not reprimanding or giving lessons or criticism – and last but not least – not gloating or rubbing your opponents’ noses in it when you receive a good board. If you refuse to meet the standards – out you go! One of the best moves ever by the ACBL!

The second phase of the educational process should delve into ethics – which is many faceted (and undoubtedly the one with the most far-reaching and constructive influence on the game). Among the ugliest of unacceptable tactics are hesitations and/or subtle tempo variations (and partners taking advantage of related hesitation breaks), playing unapproved conventions, using bidding methods that are deliberately confusing to the opponents without offering suggested ways of combating them – and the worst of all – failure to fully disclose their meanings and innuendos (known as ‘private understandings’ to which others are not privy)! Of course, body and hand movements, facial expressions, gratuitous comments and other gyrations and histrionics are no-nos as well.

However, the bottom line in our society – is the almighty dollar. That is the American Way – and wanting to keep their customer happy by not criticizing or detailing their violation of basic bridge rules is a sure way to keep them coming back. That is not what bridge should be about. If the grass roots players would be taught the amenities and be told (in a courteous and genteel manner) that the game was intended to be played by ladies and gentlemen on a level playing field (with equal advantage to all) – bridge would return to the way its founding fathers intended it to be played.

Before departing from the initiation at the club level – you must exercise some insight into the future of these players. As they improve, they will move on to sectionals and regionals – and in many cases – nationals as well. Let them not be in for the shock of their lives as they ascend to higher levels and play with the big boys. They will learn fast enough that their ‘bad habits’ are totally unorthodox and unacceptable and will be dealt with by some formal type of put-down (behavioral warning, score adjustment or even be subjected to an appeals process which is fraught with admonition to enable the culprit to see the error of his or her ways). It should never reach that point and it is the responsibility of club directors and owners to nip the problems in the bud!

Now let us turn to the individuals who rule the game – the tournament directors. They are accountable to higher beings: perhaps the Chief Tournament Director as well as their ultimate superiors — the twenty-five people who hold the esteemed positions as your ACBL Board of Directors. My disappointment is that, in my opinion, both the Directing Staff and many of those serving on the exalted Appeals Committees, have not been properly trained and educated. The stumbling blocks are time and money. My husband Bobby (whom no one will contest is the most experienced person ever to administer the game) offered to fly down to Memphis (on his own dime) and speak to the Directors, explaining their duties and responsibilities and answering any and all questions and dilemmas. However, his gracious offer was declined as the individual in charge felt it was an imposition on the directors to use their own time for such a format. This was hardly the moment for a bleeding heart to look a gift horse in the mouth and not own up to his own responsibility for the furtherance of directorial advancement and be so obsessed with the inconvenience of his flock.

As far as the Appeals Committee, though many are top players and quite familiar with the laws and the rules, there are others who sit on their high haunches and do not make impartial decisions (because of either bias or prejudice) and should be automatically recusing themselves. That seems to be a dirty word and you rarely witness self-recusals.

Let’s move right along to the Administrators and their Committee Members who make far-reaching decisions on Conditions of Contest, International Events, etc.  Many appointees are beholden to their designators who often formulate and recommend certain measures they would like effected. It is difficult for said appointees to not display loyalty to their designators. When I was in school – they called it The Spoils System. There are husbands and wives, pros and sponsors joined at the hip, teammates and others who represent the classic foxes in the henhouse. Also, patronage (pros recognizing and favoring sponsors) has been a recent factor in committee appointments which makes a travesty of the composition of certain groups. It is humanly impossible to produce a fair, impersonal, rational judgment and cast a vote objectively when personal agendas and conflicts of interest interfere. Everyone has their own dance card. Translated into bridge terms – it simply means that an individual will do what is in his or her best interests – not necessarily what will benefit the future and preservation of our once-pure and spectacular game that has gradually disintegrated into a three-ring circus with accompanying side show attractions.

Another sore spot is the Appeals Process. It is apparent to me after reading a couple of the extraordinary decisions involving some of the ‘big guns’ – that the Punish the Guilty and Protect the Innocent Theory is gone with the wind. Perhaps ego is the driving force. Every decent player wants to be in the ‘inner circle’ and thought of as a high caliber player. If you sit on an Appeals Committee and don’t concur with the actions of the high echelon players on the hot seat – it is a put-down. Thinking like they do and ruling in their favor (though they may have stepped out of bounds) may afford you the misconceived notion of conducting yourself like an expert regardless of the possible improprieties evidenced. Perhaps it is known as the comfort zone, convincing yourself that great minds think alike. Rubbish!  Exercise your independence and don’t be influenced or conned into compromising your values.

To be continued……