DeNovo

Blofeld, You say players "shouldn't be asking for undos just because they think another lead would be better after they've seen dummy". Agreed. The point of my post is that they shouldn't but they do, hence my suggestion to close this loophole. I don't know what in my posts gave you the impression that I felt "damaged", but you are mistaken. If I had felt damaged I would have called for the Director which I did not. From a purely ethical standpoint, I was hoping for declarer not to accept the undo request even before I knew that partner would choose another lead that would embarrass my holding. After you have played a few of these wild and wooly Indies, you learn how to raise your "injury quotient" so that you take bad results in stride. This IMPs result represented a minor damage, if any. However, even if I felt damaged, how does that detract from my argument? I can't see how closing an ethics loophole and requiring that you participate in partner's request for an undo is "ludicrous". What exactly are the reasons for your objections to my suggestions? The argument that you present in your post seems to be: Since the rule is people shouldn't ask for undos unless they misclick, then we ought not to do anything to prevent them from abusing this rule. This does not strike me as being a very realistic approach.

Peter, if that is your only objection then it can also be fixed. The program would just have to be modified to ignore and discard mouse clicks that occur after the last bid and before resorting is complete. I have not noticed the problem you describe myself, but I am sure it was an unintended consequence of the sorting operation. We should not however want to keep an atypical bridge circumstance (put my card back in my hand and lead something else once I've peeked at dummy) simply because it compensates for a programming glitch.

I think that the undo feature should not be available for the opening lead. I was playing in an Indy the other night when partner made his opening lead against a suit slam contract. As soon as partner saw dummy, he requested an undo which declarer granted. Dummy was short in the suit that my partner originally led, so I guess he decided that a trump lead would be better. Unfortunately, that lead emabarrassed my trump holding, and declarer was able to play the suit for no loss making an overtrick. This action by partner is against the spirit of the game. I believe that the undo feature should be used for misclicks on the wrong bid or card, not for correcting actual bad bids or plays. If we were playing bridge in a live situation, no player would allow the opening leader to replace his lead with some other card once dummy has been exposed. The same rules should apply when playing on-line. I did not want to allow the undo but I was powerless to prevent it since the transaction ocurred only between declarer and my partner. Partner requested, declarer accepted, and I was not presented with an option to decline. I suggest that the undo feature be modified so that all other players except dummy be allowed to consent to an undo before it is accepted. In summary my suggestions are: 1. Disable Undo for opening leads 2. If a defender requests an Undo, allow the partner of the defender to consent before the Undo can be accepted