Looking at cc?

[pclayton]

Anyone know if you can refer to your own cc during the auction?

 

Last I heard you could do this in a club game, but not in higher-rated events.

 

Thanks.

[inquiry]

My understanding is memory aids, including your own convention card are not allowed, even at clubs. Although the ACB: says this about convention cards:

 

The card serves two purposes: One, it tells your opponents what you play. (They, by the way, not you, are the only people entitled to look at it during the game, though clubs are somewhat lenient about this rule for the new player.) Two, making out a card allows you and your partner to get your understandings straight. Many longtime partnerships have improved just on this alone.

[Echognome]

Law 40 E 2

 

Referring to Opponents’ Convention Card

During the auction and play, any player except dummy may refer to his opponents’ convention card at his own turn to call or play, but not to his own 12.

 

12 A player is not entitled, during the auction and play periods, to any aids to his memory, calculation or technique. However, sponsoring organisations may designate unusual methods and allow written defences against opponents’ unusual methods to be referred to at the table.

[Al_U_Card]

The cc is to clearly state your agreements without the need for you to "say" them to your opps and inform your partner. When I request a cc in F2F, once having looked I always return the cc with the side of interest turned down........

[Gerben42]

Anyone know if you can refer to your own cc during the auction?

 

Is the question people answered really the real one asked? Of course you cannot look at your own CC but I guess the question is if: "look at the CC" is a sufficient answer to a question of a meaning of a certain bid.

 

Two situations I've been in:

 

* Opponent is searching the CC, not wanting to ask and not able to just look where he should look. In this case I point out on my CC where to find it so that the game can finally continue.

 

* Someone forgot an agreement but wants to give full disclosure and refers to his CC: "I don't know but it's on the convention card".

[Echognome]

Gerben - I think you are over-analyzing a bit. If the question was "Do you think you can refer opponents to your cc?" Then I don't think it would have been much of a question. The implicit assumption was that you are referring to your own cc and indeed the subject of the thread was "looking at cc".

 

It is not allowed and, at the club, I'm less inclined to point out to people when they break the laws. I will mention a short word to those that are keen and willing to learn, but not to those that blatantly neglect the laws all the time.

[pclayton]

The reason I asked is that someone in my club habitually peeks at their cc during the auction, especially when his partner makes an apparent conventional call.

 

Its not that big of a deal to me, but the person in question is an advancing player and I want to properly advise him on the legality of this matter.

 

I've always been told that its OK in a club game, but its not proper in higher levels. Aside from the memory aid issue, it seems a glance may lead to some UI issues.

[pigpenz]

The reason I asked is that someone in my club habitually peeks at their cc during the auction, especially when his partner makes an apparent conventional call.

 

Its not that big of a deal to me, but the person in question is an advancing player and I want to properly advise him on the legality of this matter.

 

I've always been told that its OK in a club game, but its not proper in higher levels. Aside from the memory aid issue, it seems a glance may lead to some UI issues.

you arent supposed to peek at your opponents hands either but if your peripheral vision is good enough well then you could probably do both :)

[Al_U_Card]

The reason I asked is that someone in my club habitually peeks at their cc during the auction, especially when his partner makes an apparent conventional call.

 

Its not that big of a deal to me, but the person in question is an advancing player and I want to properly advise him on the legality of this matter.

 

I've always been told that its OK in a club game, but its not proper in higher levels. Aside from the memory aid issue, it seems a glance may lead to some UI issues.

You might consider "admonishing" them with:

 

"Bridge is a game requiring good memory skills, reading is for learning so surely you don't want to give up bridge?"

[joshs]

It didn't used to be legal to look at your own card during a club game. There have recently been proposals by the ACBL board of directors to change this. I can't remember what came of this. Maybe look at jonathan steinberg's site?

[blackshoe]

Law 40E2 says

During the auction and play, any player except dummy may refer to his opponents' convention card at his own turn to call or play, but not to his own.

It is thus illegal to refer to your own card, and there is no provision in the Laws that would allow a sponsoring organization or zonal authority to change this law. It may be changed when the new Laws come out in the next year or two, but I doubt it.

 

That said, the ACBL seems to think (correctly, pragmatically speaking) that it can do whatever it likes as far as laws and regulations are concerned, so such a regulation may very well be in the offing - but I haven't seen one yet.

[Free]

You aren't allowed to look at your own CC, plain and simple. Not on club events, not in higher tournaments, never during the bidding or play! Looking at your CC is like having cheatsheets...

 

In clubgames however, people tend to allow more because it's considered training for big events (that's how I look at it). I don't care if opponents look at their cc on a clubevening, they're there to learn and improve. People don't go to tournaments to learn the game, but to test how good they are already.

 

In competition this year, I had an opponent which looked at his prepared defenses against our system during the bidding. I took his sheet away and said it's not allowed to have any memory aids during the game. He said that "when you come with a system like that, it's impossible for us to make something out of it". I replied "we have to study the system, you can think of and study your defenses. If one of use fails to do his homework then he might be disadvantaged, but it won't be my problem..." We don't play a HUM, so they can't look at their defenses :)

[inquiry]

You aren't allowed to look at your own CC, plain and simple.  Not on club events, not in higher tournaments, never during the bidding or play!  Looking at your CC is like having cheatsheets...

 

In clubgames however, people tend to allow more because it's considered training for big events (that's how I look at it).  I don't care if opponents look at their cc on a clubevening, they're there to learn and improve.  People don't go to tournaments to learn the game, but to test how good they are already.

 

In competition this year, I had an opponent which looked at his prepared defenses against our system during the bidding.  I took his sheet away and said it's not allowed to have any memory aids during the game.  He said that "when you come with a system like that, it's impossible for us to make something out of it".  I replied "we have to study the system, you can think of and study your defenses.  If one of use fails to do his homework then he might be disadvantaged, but it won't be my problem..."  We don't play a HUM, so they can't look at their defenses  ;)

You are wrong, free. Many mid-chart conventions and treatments allow the defenders to "refer" to defense methods during the auction.

 

Specifically the mid=chart says

 

"A defense to a method which requires the above pre-Alert may be

referred to during the auction by both pairs."

 

The methods that allow this are:

 

4. Any call that promises four or more cards in a known suit, except that

weak openings at the two-level or higher that show hands with two suits

must be no less than 5–4 distribution in the two suits.

(See items #6 and #8 in DISALLOWED below.)

5. Opening 2♦ showing a weak two-bid in an unspecified major and may

include additional strong (15+ HCP) meaning(s).

6. A 2♠ or 2NT opening bid showing an unspecified minor or both minors.

7. A transfer opening bid at the two-level or higher showing a weak bid in

the suit being transferred to or a type or types of strong hand.

8. Any strong (15+ HCP) opening bid.

9. Notrump overcall as a two-suit takeout showing at least 5-4 distribution.

 

And

 

11. Any opening bid at the three level or higher showing an undisclosed solid

suit.

[PeterE]

Furthermore free's opponent was not looking at his cc. In case of allowed written defences against HUM and Brown Sticker systems and conventions those written defences are considered to be part of the cc of the opposing pair (this example: part of free's cc).

[hrothgar]

I will make the obvious comment:

 

These sorts of matters are left to the discretion of the sponsoring authority. Some authorities such as the ACBL specifically permit players to use written defenses during the auction. Other authorities have adopted different standards.

 

Personally, I have no first hand knowledge regarding the Belgian bridge organizations policy regarding defensive methods. From the sounds of things, the Belgians only permit written defenses against HUMs and Brown Stickers. Free seems to be arguing that his system is Red and does not contain any HUMs, therefore the opponents are not permitted to use a defense.

 

An analogous situation in ACBL land would be players who wanted to use written system notes to a weak NT opening.

[barmar]

Furthermore free's opponent was not looking at his cc. In case of allowed written defences against HUM and Brown Sticker systems and conventions those written defences are considered to be part of the cc of the opposing pair (this example: part of free's cc).

Except that's not what he said. He wrote:

 

I had an opponent which looked at his prepared defenses against our system

 

So the opponent was looking at his own prepared defenses, not the ones provided by free. If you come up with your own defense, I think you're expected to remember it, and the "no memory aids" law applies. The case where you're allowed to look at the defense is when the opponents provide it for you -- since you didn't know it beforehand, there's nothing to remember, so it's not really a memory aid.

 

This is a little paradoxical -- if you do your homework to improve your methods, you're at a bit of a disadvantage compared to the ones who don't prepare ahead of time. But you're hoping that your choice of defense gives you an edge over the people playing the ones the opponents supply (kind of like playing a complex relay system -- you expect that the benefits make up for the times when you forget the system).

[PeterE]

May I object?

 

But, I admit, perhaps I wrote my thoughts somewhat mistakable ...

 

If a pair A uses a system or conventions to which written defenses are allowed by the sponsoring organisation, those written defenses (of pair :) are deemed to be part of the cc of pair A.

And this makes those written defense usable for pair B during the bidding (and playing) process.

[bid_em_up]

Ben, I am not certain, but my interpretation of the Mid-Chart info is that you may only reference the defense if you are referencing a provided defense

 

If you have a defensive method of your own, you had best know it without referencing it.

 

 

Exhibit One:

Defense Pamphlet (952-114)

Management is authorized to make available and maintain a Defense Pamphlet consisting of defenses to SuperChart and MidChart methods. This pamphlet may be used in any event in which these methods are permitted. The defense pamphlet is deemed to be a part of the convention card of a pair using MidChart and / or SuperChart methods. (See the Defense Database on the ACBL web site)

 

OK fine, if you are using a defensive method in the outlined in the pamphlet, you may reference it.

 

Exhibit Two:

 

When using a method permitted by the Mid-Chart but not by the General

Convention Chart, a pair is required to:

1. Pre-Alert the method(s)*

2. Have a written description of the method(s) available for the

opponents.

3. Except for those methods authorized by sections below with an asterisk

(numbers 1, 2, 3, and 10 under ALLOWED), have a copy of the approved

suggested defense available for opponents. Approved defenses are available in

the ACBL defense database at www.acbl.org.

 

A defense to a method which requires the above pre-Alert may be

referred to during the auction by both pairs.

 

 

This is a little less clear. I would interpret this as referring to an approved suggested defense or the provided defense (as opps may not have one prepared, are probably not familiar with the methods, and how can they use it effectively if they cant look at it?).

 

However, if I have gone outside the realm of approved defenses and created a defense of my own, it would suggest that I am at least somewhat familiar with the meanings of the opponents bids, and since my partnership elected to use a non-approved defensive bidding method, that I am responsible to know it myself, without referring to it.

 

as always, jmoo.

[jdonn]

Barmar and bid_em_up are wrong, at least in the ACBL you may look at your own defense to such methods during the auction

 

from http://www.acbl.org/play/defenseDataBase.html look at the very end of this early paragraph

 

"This database contains approved defenses to methods permitted under the ACBL Mid-Chart. When playing in an event governed by the ACBL Mid-Chart, you may refer, during the bidding and/or play, to any defense contained herein to a Mid-Chart method being used by your opponents (you may also refer to your own defensive method)."

[Free]

Before any more ACBL craprules are mentioned: HELLO, WELCOME TO PLANET EARTH! Not every league (basicly almost none EXCEPT acbl) requires players to provide their opponents of defenses...

 

My opponent prepared defenses on his own (as should be the case, get real), because we need to post our cc's before we play in competition. They saw we weren't playing many natural stuff so they did their homework. However, at the table, they are NOT allowed to look at these defenses, because we don't play HUM or BSC's. I don't even know if it's allowed to look at your own stuff against BSC's, but I know it's allowed when playing against HUM.

People are only allowed to look at their opponent's cc, and when that cc includes some defenses that's just great for them if they know how to play them, but over here that's not obligated so nobody really cares about providing opponents an edge...

[Gerben42]

So let me get this straight. You can bring written defences to the table even to MidChart methods that do not require a prepared defence (since they are starred on the MC?)

 

So I can bring my "great book of defences" and look what we play against say 1NT (2♦ = ♥ or ♠)?

[paulg]

Barmar and bid_em_up are wrong, at least in the ACBL you may look at your own defense to such methods during the auction

 

from http://www.acbl.org/play/defenseDataBase.html look at the very end of this early paragraph

 

"This database contains approved defenses to methods permitted under the ACBL Mid-Chart. When playing in an event governed by the ACBL Mid-Chart, you may refer, during the bidding and/or play, to any defense contained herein to a Mid-Chart method being used by your opponents (you may also refer to your own defensive method)."

Unfortunately this is ambiguous - does the comment about your own defensive method apply only as an alternative to a Defense Database method (so Gerben can leave his BIG book at home) or to any Mid Chart permissable convention (BIG book required) ?

 

p

[barmar]

Since the Defense Database is specific to Mid-Chart conventions, I don't think the ambiguity you refer to exists. You're only allowed to refer to your own or opponent-provided defenses to Mid-Chart methods, you aren't allowed to refer to defenses to GCC methods.