sater1957 Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 First a disclaimer. I am a very qualified TD, so maybe a rule-nut. When you are asked for an explanation there is no checkbox for "no agreement", while, especially in individual tournaments, that is usually the correct explanation. Now I know that I can type "no agreement", but that tends to evoke emotional reactions from players who think you are cheating. Even during standard at the table bridge with fixed partnerships, it is not uncommon for the correct explanation to be "no agreement", and I think it would be beneficial for the BBO world if that is formalized by having a "no agreement" button on the explanation pop-up. Hans van Staverensater1957 on BBOQualified EBL Tournament Director Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted September 17, 2005 Report Share Posted September 17, 2005 When you are asked for an explanation there is no checkbox for "no agreement", while, especially in individual tournaments, that is usually the correct explanation. Now I know that I can type "no agreement", but that tends to evoke emotional reactions from players who think you are cheating.I'm not sure having a simple check box will stop that reaction :) Although "no agreement" is often correct in individuals, I am concerned when a player makes a conventional call and then "hides" behind "no agreement" - clearly the bid was made in the expectation that it would be understood, perhaps due to the level of player opposite, so I believe it is reasonable to state this especially when there are players of different standards at the table (especially experts vs beginners/ints) For example, making a Michaels cuebid - opposite an expert you may state "no agreement" but you know that it is general bridge knowledge; however, opposite a beginner you may be concerned that the Michaels cuebid had not been covered and hence not select the call. In summary, "general bridge knowledge" varies by level: "no agreement" is fine if all the players are the same level, otherwise greater qualification may be needed. However, I do know that you are far more of an expert than I in these matters! Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 I agree with Hans There are two causes of ill-feeling among those on the receiving end of "no agreement" explanations: (1) They may doubt the veracity of the statement. Providing a button will not help in those cases. (In fact it might help, purely by speeding up the exchange so that a challenge to the explanation can be processed faster). (2) They may doubt the legality of the statement. They should not, but many do. If the software provides a button it may cause them to think twice about their conviction in their interpretation of the law. Additionally, purely from a convenience viewpoint, "no agreement" is likely to be the single most frequent valid and truthful explanation (however infrequent in absolute terms) so it may be helpful as a button for that reason if for no other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigpenz Posted September 18, 2005 Report Share Posted September 18, 2005 true especially in individuals :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.