Stop Card

[blackshoe]

And lots of players routinely refuse to pause regardless of whether the stop card is used. The problem is so rampant, in my experience, that I consider it futile to call attention to it. Most of these players are set in their ways, so no amount of complaining is likely to solve the problem.

Particularly where the club's attitude is "we don't issue procedural penalties". :P

[blackshoe]

Heh. Ran across this just now: http://llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target7.html

[finally17]

And lots of players routinely refuse to pause regardless of whether the stop card is used.  The problem is so rampant, in my experience, that I consider it futile to call attention to it.  Most of these players are set in their ways, so no amount of complaining is likely to solve the problem.

Particularly where the club's attitude is "we don't issue procedural penalties". :P

The annoying problem in my experience is when my RHO has refused to pause after partner's stop card, and then when I take a few seconds to decide how I am going to handle my partner's skip, my RHO tries to call me on being out of tempo...Even with explanation some people don't seem to grasp that the failing was in their instant pass.

[jtfanclub]

And lots of players routinely refuse to pause regardless of whether the stop card is used.  The problem is so rampant, in my experience, that I consider it futile to call attention to it.  Most of these players are set in their ways, so no amount of complaining is likely to solve the problem.

Particularly where the club's attitude is "we don't issue procedural penalties". ;)

Partner got called on it a week ago...I'd mentioned it politely to him a couple of times, but he still refuses to pause after skip bids.

 

He got a warning. We'll see if it works.

[mycroft]

Justin:

 

Okay, so I'm hooped. I follow the Laws and Rules, and that's wrong, I have to think, and you win because partner can't use that information, but you can. Where I don't have to think, the same rules apply.

 

Sorry, sir, you have enough of an advantage over me. You don't get that one.

 

No, I don't tank 10 seconds after 2NT-3NT. Partner does, and I use that time. If I don't, then the pause is clear, and you get to use it, and partner doesn't. My fault.

 

I really could care less how upset you get by me doing my best to follow Law 73A2 and D1 (clearly, nobody can be in their "standard" tempo 100% of the time, but I do try). I understand it; it disrupts your flow of the game, and you get fewer reads. But I am both allowed and expected to create a tempo that allows me to, 95+% of the time, bid in the same rhythm whether there's thinking time or not; provided I don't slow the game down to the point where I am habitually late. By the way, in a club that runs 6 minutes a board, I'm one of the catch-up pairs...

 

Also, by explicitly setting my own tempo, it is a lot harder for players to run me to their tempo. And yes, there are players who try to fast play opponents, because they can think at that speed, and their opponents can't. I bet I drive them nuts, too.

 

Re: partner reading? Oh, possibly, and if it happens he or I will likely be the first to point it out. However, the three times I've had the TD actually called by the opponents for my "hesitations", view of the hand showed that I had *nothing whatever to think about*. Take that for what it's worth.

 

And the 7 solid? If partner has x K7xxx Jxx Txxx? Isn't standard "let's hope I hit partner's suit, cause I'm never getting in to run mine"? Oh, and I'll have several witnesses that say "Oh, yes, he does that all the time. It's really annoying." Of course, in that case I was playing for the first time with that partner (but have played against him or as teammates for several years), so it's a lot less likely that he can read tells my opponents get wrong.

 

(And yes, I've said to opponents "for him, that's slow", or "for him, that's fast" when it's clear to me that partner has breached his normal tempo in an auction where the opponents might just think that there's no problem. Funny how rare that is).

 

Michael.

[barmar]

The whole thing is your tempo should be the SAME always. The arbitrary 10 second rule is silly, some auctions should have a much faster tempo. Why is 2N p 3N not a 10 second tank but 1N p 3N is a 10 second tank? That is completely silly. Why would you break tempo with 7 spades to the AKQT, you have an easy double.

Yes, ideally your tempo should be totally consistent. But that's an unrealistic expectation -- some auctions require more thought than others.

 

Yes, the skip-bid rule is a bit silly. There are certainly other bids that should probably have mandatory hesitations; for instance, I'd recommend a mandatory pause over 1NT openings, since there are many times when you might have to think about whether to employ your artificial defense (there's a recent thread about what to do after partner hesitates before passing in (1NT)-P-(3♣).

 

The rule we have is clearly a compromise. Trying to enumerate all the places where a mandatory pause should be required is impractical (it would be almost has hard to remember as the alert rules), so they picked a common situation, jump bids. Again, it would be impractical to distinguish which jump bids the mandatory skip is really useful for (weak 2's, strong 2♣) from those where it's not so useful (opening 2NT, Jacoby 2NT, late-round jumps in uncontested auctions, etc.). So the rule is deliberately kept simple.

 

HOWEVER, TDs are gnerally allowed some latitude in enforcing the rule. The distinctions I make above, based on common sense, tend to guide the actions of the TD, even though they're not written down in the rule. This is why I think you're unlikely to see anyone penalized for failing to hesitate after an opening 2NT, for example.

[Guest Jlall]

HOWEVER, TDs are gnerally allowed some latitude in enforcing the rule. The distinctions I make above, based on common sense, tend to guide the actions of the TD, even though they're not written down in the rule. This is why I think you're unlikely to see anyone penalized for failing to hesitate after an opening 2NT, for example.

Yes I agree, and I don't see any problem with common sense prevailing.

[TimG]

I don't think "even tempo" means that each call (or play) takes the same amount of time. But rather that calls (or plays) made in similar situations are made in similar amounts of time.

[Guest Jlall]

<a bunch of gibberish about me wanting to gain advantage by not using a stop card etc including "I understand it; it disrupts your flow of the game, and you get fewer reads">

Umm...ok...haha. You realize that I know that by playing fast I hurt MY side because MY partner cannot take advantage if I ever do need to think for a long time, but the opponents can. If you really think that me bidding quickly always after 1N p 3N helps MY side that is silly. It's not like I want to play slow and I want all of my opponents to play fast so that I can gain advantage. I think that taking 10 seconds on that auction every time is assinine regardless of the skip bid rules.

 

But I am both allowed and expected to create a tempo that allows me to, 95+% of the time, bid in the same rhythm whether there's thinking time or not; provided I don't slow the game down to the point where I am habitually late. By the way, in a club that runs 6 minutes a board, I'm one of the catch-up pairs...

 

I agree with this, and this was the entire point of my posts. Everyone should be able to set their own tempo. If that tempo is too slow to the point where they are late, then their tempo is too slow. If someones tempo was, for example, 10 seconds on every bid/play then they would clearly be late very often. If someones tempo is to take <1 second after 1N p 3N then that is fine by me, that is a reasonable tempo. Yes, if they break that tempo they have conveyed UI, and their partner shouldn't use it. I think it is easy for most people to play in this tempo though. If it isn't then they can try 2 seconds or 5 seconds or whatever. Do you really think TEN SECONDS is not excessive in this position? Yes, I know you are following the law to the letter but do you really believe this is what the laws were meant for?

 

I guess that I did not make my point clear but I was arguing, like you that people should be able to set their own tempos. Making a mandatory 10 second rule does not allow people to do that. Of course you should think for quite a while, and always the same amount of time, if the auction goes 1C 4S ? or something. You should play at whatever speed you are comfortable with. My point was that for me, that tempo would not be 10 seconds. And I don't think for anyone that tempo is 10 seconds after 1N p 3N. The stop card enables your OPPONENTS to set your tempo for you, not the other way around.

 

Do you not think it is backwards that your partner will always think for 10 seconds over 2N, but probably won't over 1N? Is it more likely he will need that time over 2N than 1N? And again, my point is simply if your partner would also think for 10 seconds always over 1N then his tempo is probably too slow, it is not reasonable to take 10 seconds on every action.

 

You can attack me all you want for not following a stupid law. That is certainly a debatable practice. I will definitely tell you I follow what is obviously the intended spirit of the stop card. I think my tempo is very good/normal in all situations, and I take pride in that, just as you seem to. I think if your tempo is 10 seconds over all skips that is unreasonably slow. Apparantly you are otherwise a very fast player, and that is fine, it just makes me question even more why you would deem some arbitrary 10 second rule to be a good one. Just have a tempo that you are comfortable with and follow it. I don't care WHAT that is, but in almost all auctions I'm going to guess it's less than 10 seconds.

 

I will never use the stop card, and I will never routinely think for 10 seconds in auctions where you clearly don't need that much time even on a problem hand (which you have less than 1 % of the time). By doing that, I am doing a service to the OPPONENTS/FIELD and hurting MYSELF. So please don't attack me on my motives just because you feel defensive.

[Guest Jlall]

And the 7 solid? If partner has x K7xxx Jxx Txxx? Isn't standard "let's hope I hit partner's suit, cause I'm never getting in to run mine"?

Oh, and one more thing I know this is not a post about bridge strategy but no this is definitely not standard, and if you do not lead a heart with this hand then you are really making a big error. This is an easy type of situation to do a simulation.

 

TBH most people who are serving on a committee would consider this a laughably bad lead (honestly not saying this to insult your bridge, I have no idea what kind of player you are but a spade lead on this is just downright weird and not good).I really really doubt you would win a ruling if the opponents said you hesitated over 3N and you said you did not (and you happened to have 7 solid, and your partner had led a spade). Maybe you should but it would just be pretty unbelievable and the committee would probably look at your and your partner's hand and believe there must have been table action.

[blackshoe]

I think that taking 10 seconds on that auction every time is assinine regardless of the skip bid rules.

 

[snip]

 

I will never use the stop card, and I will never routinely think for 10 seconds in auctions where you clearly don't need that much time even on a problem hand (which you have less than 1 % of the time).

I hear you Justin - but what I hear is "I think this rule is stupid, so I refuse to follow it."

 

What if everyone did that? What if they picked rules to defy that you think aren't stupid?

 

Not using the stop card is (in the ACBL, anyway) your option. Not pausing is not your option.

 

If you're willing to defy the rules in this case, how is anyone to know you aren't willing to do it in any case?

[Guest Jlall]

What if everyone did that? What if they picked rules to defy that you think aren't stupid?

Then they can be punished. That's why there are directors. Luckily directors and most people seem to agree with me that it's ok to not take 10 seconds in many instances of jumps (see what barmar wrote). If people decided that following suit was a stupid rule they would probably get revoke penalties. I'm willing to take my chances, if I ever get a procedural penalty for this maybe I will change my mind but I don't see this happening (and before people say I get favoratism from directors, I don't see this happening to ANYONE).

 

If you're willing to defy the rules in this case, how is anyone to know you aren't willing to do it in any case?

 

If anyone wants to question my ethics and/or whether I cheat that's up to them. I think anyone who has played against me knows better than this, and if they don't...well it doesn't really matter to me.

[blackshoe]

If you don't think the rule makes sense, come up with one that does make sense, and then lobby the SO to adopt it.

 

As to the question of your ethics, you opened the door to it. FWIW, from what I've heard, and read on these forums, I think you're an ethical player - but your position on this does leave that door open.

[jdonn]

I hear you Justin - but what I hear is "I think this rule is stupid, so I refuse to follow it."

Exactly!

 

What if everyone did that? What if they picked rules to defy that you think aren't stupid?

Who cares what if - they don't! If they did, that would be their problem!

 

Not using the stop card is (in the ACBL, anyway) your option. Not pausing is not your option.

Because of a rule that would be stupid for people who know better to follow - see point 1,

 

If you're willing to defy the rules in this case, how is anyone to know you aren't willing to do it in any case?

Why should he care what anyone else thinks they know about things that they don't really know about?

[awm]

The really serious issue is people who sometimes use the stop card and sometimes don't. This is also very difficult to do anything about, since you need a lot of observations of the person in question, and mentioning it to a director won't do anything right away.

 

There's at least one good bridge player in my area who is inconsistent with his use of the stop card. I don't think he is "trying to cheat" -- instead, my suspicion is that when he has something to think about he uses the stop card and when his bid is "obvious" he forgets. Unfortunately the upshot is that when he uses the stop card he has something "unusual" like a 2M opening with a 6-5 hand, or a 2NT rebid with a singleton in partner's suit. If I've noticed this in the course of occasionally playing against this fellow, what are the odds that his regular partners (who've been playing with him longer than I've been alive) have noticed too? And what can I possibly do about the situation?

 

Because of this issue, I sometimes think we'd be better off without the "stop card" altogether.

[blackshoe]

In my experience (such as it is) people don't get called on breaks in tempo for any of several reasons:

 

1. nobody noticed.

2. nobody cares.

3. it's "unfriendly".

4. "I didn't know if I should call".

5. "I didn't know I could call".

6. there's probably others.

 

As a player and a director, I wonder whether any particular break in tempo might (a) result in an opponent, all unconciously, taking advantage of inferences drawn (B) make any difference at all © be worth whatever annoyance a director call may cause. In practice, as a player I try to follow the rules - and I hope my opponents do too. As a director, well, if I'm not called, I've got nothing to worry about, and if I am called, I simply follow the laws and regulations in force, and I'm sure Justin will live with it if I rule against him. B)

 

I'm sure Justin is right that his refusal to obey this regulation (and he's probably not the only one) rarely causes any immediate problem - but if he does it against beginners, they will learn that it's okay for them to defy it, too. And if it's okay to defy this regulation, why not that one? Or that other one? I really think in the long run this attitude does a disservice to the game.

[Guest Jlall]

In my experience (such as it is) people don't get called on breaks in tempo for any of several reasons:

 

1. nobody noticed.

2. nobody cares.

3. it's "unfriendly".

4. "I didn't know if I should call".

5. "I didn't know I could call".

6. there's probably others.

Agree at lower levels like a club game or sectional. At higher levels of play none of these are the case. People have an itchy trigger finger for BIT director calls.

 

However, at higher levels no one calls the director if you don't pause for 10 seconds after 1N p 3N, or if they open 2N and you don't wait 10 seconds. The director is also not called if you are generally fast and take 5 seconds rather than 10 seconds after 1H 4S. The reason for this is obvious.

 

As a director, well, if I'm not called, I've got nothing to worry about, and if I am called, I simply follow the laws and regulations in force, and I'm sure Justin will live with it if I rule against him.

 

What does this mean? A BIT is an infraction but not cause for an adjustment unless there is some UI from it that partner takes advantage of (or may have taken advantage of). Or are you saying you will give me a procedural penalty for taking only a few seconds over a skip, or less than 1 second over something like 1N p 3N? I really can't see you giving a procedural penalty for failing to take 10 seconds over 1N p 3N. If so you are different than any director I have met and I do not think the laws require you to do this.

[blackshoe]

Heh. Just as an example, the current laws pretty much require the TD to give a PP to any player who does not call the TD when attention has been drawn to an irregularity (because Law 9B1(a) uses the words "...the director must be called..."). Of course, it never happens - and after I pointed this out on the bridge laws mailing list several years ago, the WBF changed the word from "must" to "should" in the 2007 laws.

 

I guess we've been talking a bit at cross-purposes, Justin, both focusing on the levels at which we each play (and in my case, direct). I grant you that at your level, the culture is different, and that a TD needs to be sensitive to that - up to a point, at least. :angry:

 

I would not ordinarily give a PP where the laws give me discretion not to do so (IOW, in most cases) unless the infraction caused a problem - and the fact that somebody called the TD isn't enough of a problem. I might adjust the score, though, in a BIT case. Depends on the case. :)

[Mbodell]

Because of this issue, I sometimes think we'd be better off without the "stop card" altogether.

There is no doubt in my mind that at the club level, at least where I play, we'd be better off without stop cards. The primary usage of the stop card, at the club level, seems to be wake up partner so they realize that I skipped a level. And, in addition to people selectively using the stop card on purpose, people have issues with selectively using the stop card because bidding boxes don't always have a stop card in them.

 

I decided both because I was worried I might forget some of the time to play the stop card and because some times there is no stop card that I would just never use the stop card.

[paulg]

In the UK the use of the stop card has always been mandatory. It is a guide for the next player to take 5-10 seconds before making a call, however quickly or slowly it is removed. It took some time to get used to when it was first introduced, but generally people use the card consistently and we don't seem to have the same troubles over here.

 

I think the ACBL's flexible option (you may use if you wish) is largely to blame for undermining the stop card and it is really too late for clubs to try and force people to use it now.

 

Of course I have no problem with Justin's tempo as he is a very good player who understands which auctions are more tempo sensitive, however he is not your average club player for whom the regulations are written.

 

Paul

[mycroft]

The problem is that nobody has a problem with <3 rounds of noncompetitive auction>-skip 4NT, or skip-3D ... until they do.

 

The problem with not following the rule "that is stupid and nobody follows it" is that if one responds in 2-3 seconds over all the skip bids, and then on the 14th board of a set, it goes 3C-<6 or 7 second pause> p, it is *abundantly clear* that there has been a hesitation, *pretty clear* what the UI is, but if the TD is called, he's in around his 10 seconds, and they can't rule hesitation.

 

Yes, it happens. Yes, I've had long discussions trying to prove that the fast passes, which don't really provide UI as long as that's their normal tempo, mean that this is out of tempo for LHO and there is a problem. It's clear that there is an issue with the equivalent situation with the screen regulations, where "it is to be assumed that no information is passed by the tray taking 15-25 seconds to be passed back under the screen, and both passer (by holding the tray) and his screenmate (by holding the call they intend to make, but not placing it on the tray) are to regulate the tempo to assure this" (paraphrase), but there are several records in Appeal Casebooks where despite this regulation, it was clear that there was a noticeable hesitation, and it was clear where it came from, and UI got passed anyway, and the TD ruled, and it got taken to appeal. Why? Because "it's a stupid rule" and nobody follows it - until they should have, and we get a TD ruling, an appeal, and heated tempers instead.

 

Given the number of hands played under screens versus not, and the number of not very careful players who get to play under screens versus not, this causes a larger problem than one might think.

 

Of course, since it always happens, the TDs don't do anything if you call for an insta-pass (including "I didn't get a chance to even let go of my bid before the pass came out"). And of course, when the insta-passers *do* have a problem, they think - frequently as much as 10 seconds. And of course, there's nothing you can do about *that* either (see above). And of course, WeaSeL seems to always work here...

 

Justin, I'm sorry for the tone of my previous post. It sounded like you were attacking my style, that following the rules didn't help, and that it caused *you* a problem that I did it. Your response raises several salient points (which I need to review again before respnding to), but in particular makes clear that my impression was incorrect.

 

Michael.

[barmar]

Michael has it right about the intent of the mandatory hesitation: to make those cases where you actually DO have something to think about look normal.

 

The fallacy in the requirement, though, is in the assumption that this is particular to skip bids. What about all the times when you take a little longer to decide whether to overcall over a 1-level opening?

 

But maybe that doesn't happen so much. Usually when one picks up their hand, they can think ahead -- decide what they'll do if partner opens, RHO bids 1 something, or the bidding passes around to them. But it's harder to plan for all the higher-level bids. Much of the time you're going to pass (the preempt worked) or your plan over the 1 level works just as well at the 2 level, but there will also be many times when you'll have to stop and make a new plan. The mandatory pause should hopefully prevent the UI that distinguishes the cases.