[blml] Appeals Committees at ACBL NABCs

[Guthrie]

[Adam Wildavski]
> I've learned that in Chicago the BOD will
> consider a motion to replace player ACs with
> TD Panels.
> I strongly support the current method of using
> appeals committees for NABC events.
> Since this matter first came up four years ago
> I've been publishing detailed statistics
> regarding the results of ACs and Panels.
> They can be found here:
>
http://www.tameware.com/adam/bridge/laws/nabc_case
book_summaries.html
>
> While the judgment of correctness in each case
> is mine I have published all my findings and
> invited casebook readers to challenge
> any they disagree with. I've received only a
> handful of such challenges, and have modified
> my findings whenever the challenge seemed
> reasonable.
>
> My data cover 293 AC and 222 Panel rulings
> over a period of five years, through the Dallas
> NABC. In brief, I found that when ACs
> changed TD rulings, and excluding cases I
> judged too close to call, they improved them
> 82% of the time and worsened them 18% of the
> time.
> I feel terrible about that 18%, especially
> since some of those were perpetrated by
> committees I served on or even chaired. Panels,
> however, had a poorer record, improving 72% of
> the rulings they changed while worsening 28%,
> again excluding cases I judged too close
> to call. This difference becomes more
significant
> if we take into account that cases heard by
> Panels tend to be more straightforward
> than those heard by ACs.
> On a practical basis, then, I don't see what is
> to be accomplished by instituting a system that
> we can expect will produce more injustice
> than the current one. The cost savings, if any,
> would seem to be minor.
> In terms of jurisprudence I also find the
> proposal lacking. Since both the TDs who make
> the decision and the members of the panel
> report to the Chief TD the appeal in effect is
> from one jurisdiction into that same
> jurisdiction. When decisions are made by our
> top TDs, who have consulted with other top TDs,
> a panel of TDs will naturally be reluctant to
> overturn the decision.
> Players enjoy our tournaments in large part
> because they perceive them to be fair. It's
> important that we should be seen to do our
> utmost to maintain that fairness.

[nige1]
I'm not a member of the ACBL but fear that if
the America adopts director panels, then the
civilised world may experience adverse
repercussions.

Typically, directors are much less (or much more
skilful) than the players for whom they care.
Players see the appeal committee as a jury of
their peers
sifting the facts but with their judgement
constrained by subservience to the law.

Often, however, the law is so woolly that nobody
can understand it. Nevertheless, directors reach
an uneasy consensus among themselves. Good appeals
committees expose such anomalies and apply natural
justice to generate valuable case law.