Asking Questions

[Echognome]

I shared this with a couple BBF members earlier, but I thought it might be interesting for some others.

 

I went back to my old club last night. I was reminded why I no longer go there. Below are a few auctions we had. See if you can spot the concern.

 

Uncontested by us:

(A) = alerted

 

First example:

1♣(A) - (P) - 2♦(A) - (P)

2♥(A) - (P) - 3♦(A) - (P)

3♥(A) - "What does 3♥ mean?"

"It's a relay asking me to describe my hand further."

"Ok." - (P) - ...

 

Second example:

1♣(A) - "Is that weak?"

"No. It's 16+ any shape."

"Ok." - (P) - 1♦ - (1♠) ....

 

Third example:

2♣(A) - "What's that?"

"It shows 11-15 hcp and 6+ clubs." - (P) - 2♦ -

"What's that?"

"It is a relay asking me to describe my hand further." - (P)

...

 

Ok. Now can you guess which suits each of our opponents had on the auctions above? I certainly could.

 

Now we were there just to practice so I didn't say anything about it. However, I was rather disappointed that things still hadn't changed.

 

I could quote the laws on Unauthorised Information (UI), but the gist of it is that asking questions can give partner UI, whether it be in the bidding or the play of the hand. Giving UI is not illegal per se, but using it is. I say this as a diatribe, but I also wanted to offer a few tips to players to make the game more friendly and more fair.

 

1. If your opponents bring a convention card to the table and place it down on the table in front of you, at least give it a glance over. Then you will not be so surprised if you see an unusual bid.

 

2. If you are surprised by an alert and it's definition affects whether you will bid, then by all means ask for an explanation. But if you weren't going to bid anyway, save your question until the end of the auction. Do not ask questions at this point just because you are curious.

 

3. Try not to ask questions about specific bids if possible. I find it much more palatable to be asked about an entire auction, in particular if there are many alerted bids. In such cases, I usually ask "Can you take me through the auction?" and try to get the bids explained in order. That takes the focus off any particular bid. However, if the auction has been entirely natural except for blackwood, asking "what did the response to blackwood show?" seems reasonable to me.

 

4. If you partner does ask inappropriate questions try to ignore it as much as possible. Think of how you will bad your hand in isolation to anything partner has asked. It might be clear to bid on your hand given the bids you see on the table, but if not you should try to take the most normal action you can. Have a word with partner after the hand about asking inappropriate questions.

 

Finally, I wanted to quote the orange book (EBU) on this as I like the way they exposit these concerns.

 

The right to ask questions is not a licence to do so without consequence: if you ask about an unalerted call and then pass, you have shown an interest which may influence your partner. Asking about an alerted call and then bidding reduces this possibility, but in either case if your partner acts in a way that suggests he has taken advantage of your question, then unauthorised information may be deemed to have been given. Similarly, if you ask a question and then pass, thus ending the auction, your partner's choice of lead, from the logical alternatives available, must not be one that could have been suggested by your question. (Law 16A, 73F1)

 

Note: If, at your turn to call, you do not need to have a call explained, it is in your interest to defer all questions until either you are about to make the opening lead or your partner's lead is face-down on the table.

 

 

Just my tuppence.

 

Matt

[EricK]

I understand your concerns. But if the rules about taking advantage of UI were strictly enforced, then these unnecessary questions would help your side much more than the opposition.

 

So if you have any complaints they should be aimed at the TD for letting these people get away with it, or for not educating them.

[Walddk]

Excellent post Matt. We all see the excessive asking, especially in club games, and in most cases there is no intent as to conveying UI to partner. Some think that it's their duty to ask questions every time a bid is alerted.

 

We even see those questions being asked out of turn. Again, I don't think people mean to guide their partners; it happens for two reasons mainly:

 

1. Out of curiosity.

2. Ignorance of the rules and regulations. *

 

* When they are specifically interested in a single bid and concentrate on that during or after the auction.

 

We could of course have a debate about ethics at the table, but that would take forever, and I know that many club players would take offence if they stood corrected regarding behaviour. It's a very delicate topic.

 

I have countless examples of how the players take the Law into their own hands and make the rulings. Afterwards, and only then, do they approach the TD and ask what they should have done.

 

"Call the TD when an irregularity occurs, please. It's against the law to make your own rulings, and the TD will only be happy to assist you. That's what he/she is there for".

 

Roland

[mike777]

A real issue for over 40 years.

These club players basically pay/support world bridge. Average age =68,,,,Median age is much lower...we can only hope and I am old. We are lucky to remember our names let alone what we play.

 

Younger online players need to step up and pay and support change.

[Trinidad]

Let me first say that I basically agree with you. Your experience at that club was the example of how bridge should not be played.

 

But then I disagree with you on the following:

 

2. If you are surprised by an alert and it's definition affects whether you will bid, then by all means ask for an explanation.  But if you weren't going to bid anyway, save your question until the end of the auction.  Do not ask questions at this point just because you are curious.

 

Of course, I understand what you mean. If you usually don't ask, a sudden question gives UI to partner that you were thinking of bidding. In that case, asking and passing is clear UI. But: If you don't ask a question and then pass, it will give your partner UI that you were not interested in a bid. This UI is just as useful as the ask and pass UI.

 

The solution to this problem is simple. Make sure that you know what their bidding means regardless of your hand. That way your questions will not carry UI. After all, you would ask with 0 points or 28 and with 8 cards in the suit bid or with a void.

 

Obviously you shouldn't carry this too far. The above rule goes for bidding situations where you could reasonably be interested in getting into the auction. (There is no sense in asking what every bid in a 10 round relay sequence means.)

 

In case you were wondering whether not asking can give UI think about the following example. Your left hand opponent deals, puts down the STOP card and opens 2♦ which is promptly alerted. Your partner waits for 10 seconds and passes. Do you seriously think that he was contemplating a bid? He could just as well have saved 10 seconds by passing immediately.

 

On the other hand, imagine that your left hand opponent deals, puts down the STOP card and opens 2♦ which is promptly alerted. Your partner asks what it means (as usual) and hears that it was Multi. Now he thinks 10 seconds and passes. If you are in the habit of asking routinely, you will not have any UI. He can have a borderline pass or a hand that was not interested at all. Exactly what the STOP card procedure was meant for.

 

Rik

[Rebound]

I agree entirely with the above posts, however, I am guilty many times over of asking at my first opportunity if the alert is in the first round(+a bit) of the auction. There are far too many treatments, particularly in response to the opening bid, for any one of them to be considered really standard nowadays, IMO. Sometimes they are provided on the opps CC, and sometimes not. But in a club game, where you are behind due to slow players as often as not, it is far more efficient if when the auction goes, say, 1♣ - p - 1♠'Alert' - to you, you can just say, "Yes?", and then get on with the auction.

 

1♣-p-1♠ may actually be a bad example, however, since I was mainly referring to strong auctions where it is unlikely either you or partner will make a call besides a double of the final contract. I find that just asking about the first alerted call if it comes in the first round or two of the auction gives one a quick snapshot of the rest of the opps bidding treatments since they are generally interrelated.

 

I realize this may be a bad habit. At the same time, my regular partners are aware of this habit and that by asking, it may be argued I convey no UI since I frequently ask regardless of whether I intend to make any call other than pass. This is rather a wiggly line to tip toe on, however, so I am inclined to agree if you are thinking I should forego it all together.

[Blofeld]

I agree with Trinidad.

 

I will always try to find out what my opponent's first couple of calls in an auction mean (of course usually a CC will do this for me rather than asking) - if I didn't then it would convey UI to partner. After we get into an auction that I'm clearly very unlikely to act on then I'm happy not knowing until the end of the auction. Which is why I don't like your opponents' action in the first example (especially if they hadn't asked about previous bids, but to an extent even if they had). If I am going to ask, I will avoid leading questions -- asking "is that weak?" of 1♣ certainly fails here.

 

But I can't see anything wrong with what the opponents did in the third example. Unless they never normally ask questions before bidding (as opposed to passing), then asking questions some of the time here conveys just as much UI when you don't ask as when you do. It's still very much a live auction and one where they might want to come in (particularly if 2♣ and 2♦ were weak bids), so in the absence of CCs I would ask about this every time, regardless of my hand. I hate giving UI to my partners, and staying silent [again, if there are no CCs] definitely would give UI.

[ArcLight]

I disagree with all the above.

 

Were the opps trying to pass illegal information? If so, then thats a problem, and you should speak with the TD.

Or were they clueless (didnt understand the auctions).

There are plenty of players who dont know Precision or MOSCITO.

How are they to know what to do if they dont understand the auction?

 

If anything YOU And your partner are getting the benefit of them asking questions, in case you have a bidding misunderstanding.

 

Maybe an opp has a hand worth overcalling/balancing with but doesn't understand the auction. What are they supposed to do?

 

At least in BBO I can ask each opp questions, and they can alert their bids with accompanying text. (I find it interesting to learn about systems as I encounter them)

 

In a club game, if you aren't going to bid, then it pays to be quiet and ask for a detailed explanation at the end. Thats probably annoying for you, and time cionsuming, especially if they ask a lot of questions, and take a while processing the information.

 

But what is the alternative? That they should not get the chance to think? Wouldn't that be a huge benefit to using a non-standard system (for the sake of argument call anything other than SAYC,2/1 non standard in the USA even though there are good plyers who use other systems)

 

 

One last point. Not everyone who plays Bridge is as serious about it as you are. There are plenty who play it socially. It takes their fun away if they have no idea what the auction means. Its frustrating for them, and its frustrating for you when they ask all these questions.

[kgr]

If anything YOU And your partner are getting the benefit of them asking questions, in case you have a bidding misunderstanding.

This should not be true. The explanation given by your partner is unauthorized information fo you (even if opps ask questions without an intention to bid and only for their information).

If partner gives wrong information then you should keep bidding as if partner did gave the correct explanation; And then still this wrong information could require an adjustment if opps didn't find their correct bidding because of it.

If you did bid wrong and partner gives correct explanation; then you should keep bidding as you would with the initial knowledge of the bid you have done.

[badderzboy]

Asking and not asking questions is a dangerous topic.

 

If u were really shifty you could ask a question about a bid when u are interested in that lead during the auction and so on. I've had it done to me - my favourite one was - is that natural (aghast) and then shaking head when answered yes - guess who had 7 cards in that suit...

 

The most common UI situation is the 1NT - what's your range - weak - ok pass ... opposing ptr finds a bid with nothing and of course u set the director on them ! Also done over weak 2 and numerous others! so called French defence...

 

I've seen a lot of this in the few years I've played and I used to as a beginner be intrigued enough to ask about every alert just about and so partner had no idea if I had anything.

 

Now I find out what system they are playing first and NT etc and then either ask only if there is a likelihood I'll bid and trust partner not to consider it ie your bid must be reasonable for that hand.

 

Alternatively wait until the end of the auction when u need to know to formulate the defence and also do that if I have nothing too to be ethical.

 

Rule of thumb is if they are a beginner fair enough but experienced players should know better (and probably do) and that includes most club players so when they do ask and pass consider reserving your rights!

 

Steve

[david_c]

Agree with Owen: the third example would not worry me, but the first example is particularly bad. (Though it does also depend on the speed and tone of the question, which is difficult to convey in writing.)

 

For my part, playing face-to-face I always ask when my RHO opens two of a suit. I'm not sure I'd expect a TD to believe me that this does not transmit UI, but it keeps my conscience clear anyway, and I only have to keep this up for another six months.

 

One last point. Not everyone who plays Bridge is as serious about it as you are. There are plenty who play it socially. It takes their fun away if they have no idea what the auction means. Its frustrating for them, and its frustrating for you when they ask all these questions.

That's very true. No wonder Matt said, "I was reminded why I no longer go there." Playing an unusual system against opponents who aren't used to unusual systems is generally no fun at all.

[Al_U_Card]

Obviously, any consistent approach is preferable. The one that is without reproach is NEVER asking. (At the end of the auction, however, a request for a review with full explanation of all alerts is also preferable.)

[ArcLight]

>If u were really shifty you could ask a question about a bid when u are interested in that lead during the auction and so on. I've had it done to me - my favourite one was - is that natural (aghast) and then shaking head when answered yes - guess who had 7 cards in that suit...

 

 

This is shifty. I wouldn't like it done to me. But then where is the fun in cheating? Its far easier to cheat, especially at a low level game. You can develop some gesture signals, such as looking at RHO with a good hand, and LHO with a bad.

 

In the case where you describe can you discuss this with the TD and ask him to observe the opps?

 

 

>That's very true. No wonder Matt said, "I was reminded why I no longer go there." Playing an unusual system against opponents who aren't used to unusual systems is generally no fun at all.

 

Im not used to them, so I guess we shouldn't play against each other.

 

Thankfully, this isnt a problem on BBO because of the text box available with the alerts.

[Echognome]

I disagree with all the above.

To answer your concerns, I will address them one at a time.

 

Were the opps trying to pass illegal information?  If so, then thats a problem, and you should speak with the TD.

Or were they clueless (didnt understand the auctions).

There are plenty of players who dont know Precision or MOSCITO.

How are they to know what to do if they dont understand the auction?

 

I agree with Roland on this one. I believe the overwhelming majority of players are NOT trying to cheat. They just cannot help themselves from asking. I look at their hands afterwards and notice they have the suit they have been asking about. I try to say to them politely that they should wait until the end of the auction to ask and they want to hear nothing about it.

 

The second point is that even if the opponents were not trying to consciously pass illegal information, they are doing it subconsciously. It gives them an illegal advantage whether they want to admit it or not. We honestly weren't too bothered about it this time as we were just practicing and do not play there often. I just thought it a shame that it hadn't changed much.

 

If anything YOU And your partner are getting the benefit of them asking questions, in case you have a bidding misunderstanding.

 

I think you have this very wrong. There are two cases here. Suppose what is most likely that we understand our bids perfectly. Then there is no advantage of us explaining our bids. Now suppose that we did have a misunderstanding and myself or partner gives the wrong explanation. Now we are in trouble because WE have violated the laws by giving misinformation. We will also unauthorised information that our partner (our ourself) has forgotten an agreement. This makes bidding quite awkward indeed. We then have to strain to bid as though partner (or yourself) hadn't forgotten at all. We are also possibly subject to an adjustment by the TD afterwards. I fail to see how this benefits us.

 

Maybe an opp has a hand worth overcalling/balancing  with but doesn't understand the auction.  What are they supposed to do?

 

Note that in my original post, I never said that opponents should not ask questions. I said, "If... its definition affects whether you will bid, then by all means ask for an explanation." So I don't see your point here.

 

At least in BBO I can ask each opp questions, and they can alert their bids with accompanying text.  (I find it interesting to learn about systems as I encounter them)

 

Yes online bridge has some definite advantages and in particular the system eliminates a large portion of unauthorised information problems. In face to face bridge, screens help quite a bit as well. Of course online bridge has other problems in regards to UI (instant messaging, kibbing yourself, etc.). As per being curious to learn about systems, I have no problem with that. I just think there's an appropriate time to ask. We sit down at a table, we put our convention cards down on the table. 90% of the time, the opponents aren't interested, even though we are one of the few pairs with a convention card. We are happy to explain our entire auction after the bidding is over. We nearly always finish with five minutes to go in the round and are happy to let the opponents look at our convention card afterwards and answer questions. I think the opportunity to learn about new things is there. There is just a time and a place for it.

 

In a club game, if you aren't going to bid, then it pays to be quiet and ask for a detailed explanation at the end.  Thats probably annoying for you, and time cionsuming, especially if they ask a lot of questions, and take a while processing the information.

 

I don't find it annoying at all. My partner and I play fairly quickly, so we are seldom pressed for time. It usually takes about 30 seconds to explain an auction. We are happy to explain all of our bids and also alternatives we had but did not choose. I can tell you that we are MUCH happier explaining the auction at the end of the bidding than during the bidding.

 

One last point.  Not everyone who plays Bridge is as serious about it as you are.  There are plenty who play it socially.  It takes their fun away if they have no idea what the auction means.  Its frustrating for them, and its frustrating for you when they ask all these questions.

 

Ok. So you're not going to make everyone happy. I am sure that some pairs would ONLY be happy if everyone played Acol (or SAYC in the states). But, since there are several different options for when they play (Tues and Fri is considered the advanced night, Mon the intermediate night, Wed the beginner night, and Thur is a fairly mixed crowd), then I don't see this being a huge problem. If you only want to play against other pairs playing a simple system, don't play on an advanced night.

 

I know there is going to be some social conflict when you have players of all different abilities and aspirations, but there should be common ground on how we play the game. (And there is! The bridge laws tell us how.) I just think we need to educate the players on the ethics of the game. We are not out to make aspersions of cheating. We are out to teach them how they should compose themselves at the table. If they are never taught, how can we expect them to know? As an aside, do any BIL teachers or bridge teachers teach this to their students? I think they should.

[luis]

The problem is that bridge players are not well educated about the rules and most of them don't even care about the rules.

I've faced similar situations in the past, when the pair is a social bridge pair or a bad pair I try to be very polite and explain them that by rule they have to ask about all the alerts at their turn or at the end but can't just ask for some of them. Of course this is not in the rules but they understand this a lot better than UI, as soon as you mention UI to a bad pair they think you are accusing them of cheating or something.

 

When the pair is a good one, I just call the TD and inform the facts without any explanation, the TD usually says "If there is UI you have your rights reserved" and leaves, that is usually enough to make them stop doing what they do and scare them to ask about all the alerts or none of them.

 

In my partnership by rule we ask about all the alerts basically because knowing what's going on can help you in the middle of the auction and because when they have to say what each bid means then if something is wrong there is UI that they can't use. Without the explanation something might "figure out" what happened.

 

Just my 2c

 

Luis

[cherdano]

I think there are two issues:

 

1) When do we ask about alerts?

2) How strictly are we trying to enforce the law in a weak local duplicate?

 

About 2): I am very very reluctant to strictly enforce the law by calling the TD in these kind of situations, unless I would think it would be common practice in this particular club. Yes they may gain an unlawful advantage, but so what. I find it much more important to keep a friendliness at the table, than worry about these kind of things.

 

The crux is really that we are playing a different game then they are: competitive bridge vs social bridge. (And they know this, and often feel some pressure due to this as soon as you arrive at the table.) I feel like a guest in these clubs, and won't force them to change their game from social bridge to competitive bridge. I would never call the TD for UI, I would almost always wave a revoke penalty, etc. Yes, to the purist I give up on playing "bridge as defined in the law", but I don't care. (Of course, it is all different against a more serious pair.)

 

Yes I may have a 63% instead of a 67% game, but as we agreed on in the other thread, we don't care so much about that anyway, as long as we managed to have some fine bidding misunderstanding on the way.

 

Arend

[Guest Jlall]

I feel like a guest in these clubs, and won't force them to change their game from social bridge to competitive bridge. I would never call the TD for UI, I would almost always wave a revoke penalty, etc.

Agree 1000 %. Only if playing against another experienced tournament pair would I ever even consider calling the director for UI (because they should know better).

[pclayton]

I've had this one a few times:

 

1x - 1y

3y - 3z

4x - 4N

5z

 

Opponents are silent.

 

In the middle of all this, NOW comes the question:

 

Opponent (not on lead) ........what is "5z"

 

I basically tell the inquisitor that unless he really wants to make a bid at the 6 level, he has just given UI to his partner.

 

I usually get a response, "I's my turn to bid, so I can ask".

 

After he gets the explanation of "5z", the green card comes out. :)

[Sigi_BC84]

I feel like a guest in these clubs, and won't force them to change their game from social bridge to competitive bridge. I would never call the TD for UI, I would almost always wave a revoke penalty, etc.

Agree 1000 %. Only if playing against another experienced tournament pair would I ever even consider calling the director for UI (because they should know better).

Well, many of the so called "social players" are experienced tournament players -- after all, they come to the club several times a week to play "social bridge". I have found that, among them, there are quite a few who deliberately use unauthorized information gathered through several means during the auction and play. Others do it subconciously, because never anything bad happens (i.e. they are not penalized out of courtesy).

 

Now I'm certainly not one of the purists who are trying to enforce the Laws during each and every hand, regardless whom I'm playing with. In that regard I agree with you: if they are basically just clueless and I consider them friendly and honest players, I will not call the TD in many cases (Arend has put it quite well).

 

The problem is that if you keep such an attitude (and many ambitious players do that in fact), you create an atmosphere where using UI or even blatant cheating will become fashionable, because calling the TD is perceived as an offense. This is in my eyes a good argument to be consistent about your attitude towards the Laws; because if everybody follows you and the TD is called also for minor issue, general discipline among all players is created (or at least encouraged).

 

Of course this is a delicate issue. Many clubs (including my own) live off the "herd" that gathers there for social play. These people might go play somewhere else if you start creating an environment that is "too competitive" for them -- and your club will suffer from it.

 

--Sigi

[Sigi_BC84]

I basically tell the inquisitor that unless he really wants to make a bid at the 6 level, he has just given UI to his partner.

 

I usually get a response, "I's my turn to bid, so I can ask".

 

After he gets the explanation of "5z", the green card comes out.  :D

This is one of the cases, where in my eyes, you should simply call the TD and have him (or her) explain to the opps what they have done wrong. Make it clear that its not you offending them but simply that the Laws of Bridge require you to take steps against possible unathorized information being used.

 

If that position is upheld by the players knowledgeable enough to know when and where there is the time to take such measures, offending pairs will simply stop passing information of that kind -- at least when they are playing against you.

 

Actually you can't do much against people getting mad at you because of such matters. If you don't take any steps and always swallow your anger, that's only hurting your own enjoyment. I don't think it's being selfish or ignoring rules of good conduct to be a little bit competitive and serious about it all. Smart opponents will understand, regardless of them being bad players.

 

--Sigi

[Free]

A clear case of UI passing to partner that I heard of yesterday:

 

At low level competition the bidding goes (it's aweful, but that doesn't matter much):

North East South West

3♣! - Dbl - 3♦! - pass

4♦ - 5♣ - 5♦ - pass

pass - 6♣ - Dbl - pass

...

3♣ was transfer preempt. Now North starts thinking, South notices that and takes a card and places it ready to lead!!! Why didn't he say: "P, it was a penalty double, so shut up and let me lead" :D Bidding continued pass - pass obviously...