Explanation of bidding

[Guest Jlall]

I would adjust against you.

[hrothgar]

Relatively minor quibble:

 

I think that 2♥ should be described as a puppet to 2♠ rather than a relay.

 

I think that a (reasonable) explanation is

 

"Puppet to 2!S showing either Hearts or a Balanced hand"

 

You should (then) explain that 3NT shows a balanced whatever

[ArtK78]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

:)

[matmat]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

:)

i wonder what you're implying.

[Stephen Tu]

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

 

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

 

save yourself some hassle ...

[Guest Jlall]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

:)

Nope, I just really think if you are ever going to play something artificial you should explain it in a clear and concise way. I think you failed to do that, and because of that your LHO did not lead a heart.

[Mbodell]

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

 

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

 

save yourself some hassle ...

I describe this the same way that you do with capital OR, but I always wonder if my opponents might be unsure if I mean 25+ (bal or H) or (25+ bal) or H. Or for suction stuff if I type D OR H+S if they get that I mean (D) OR (H+S) not (D OR H) + S. I mean I know reasonable people will understand, especially if they are used to these bids and have seen them before, but it is hard to tell when it is all typed and none of the visual clues from F2F are there about if the opponents understand or not.

[Cascade]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

:)

Nope, I just really think if you are ever going to play something artificial you should explain it in a clear and concise way. I think you failed to do that, and because of that your LHO did not lead a heart.

I agree a clearer explanation would have been better.

 

However I am not convinced that the opponents were damaged. It seems they understood Kokish and they opening post clearly stated that the bid (2♥) was explained as being artificial.

 

That means that you need to come up with a good reason to lead a heart with a different explanation when you wouldn't against an artificial 2♥.

[Stephen Tu]

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

 

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

 

save yourself some hassle ...

I describe this the same way that you do with capital OR, but I always wonder if my opponents might be unsure if I mean 25+ (bal or H) or (25+ bal) or H. Or for suction stuff if I type D OR H+S if they get that I mean (D) OR (H+S) not (D OR H) + S.

OK so make it

"H OR 25+ bal"

 

less ambiguous, or add a couple parentheses.

[onoway]

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them accurately,concisely and speedilly. The confusion of having to ask for an explanation of the bidding box alert, then waiting and figuring out what it is in chat and then having to sort out what to do about it puts a degree of time and psychological pressure on the opps which seems a bit unfair. I know many many less able players will simply go on in total bewilderment because of time pressures and the stress of trying to haul an explanation out of a bidder.

It has always struck me as a bit of one upsmanship to plunk a convention name into the bidding box and wait to see what the opps do about it, esp if there is reason to suspect they may not know it.

[effervesce]

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them  accurately,concisely and speedilly. The confusion of having to ask for an explanation of the bidding box alert, then waiting and figuring out what  it is in chat and then having to sort out what to do  about  it puts a degree of time  and psychological  pressure on the opps which seems a bit unfair. I know many many less able players will simply go on in total bewilderment because of time pressures and the stress of trying to haul an explanation out of a bidder.   

It has always struck me as a bit of one upsmanship to plunk a convention name into the bidding box and wait to see what the opps do about it, esp if there is reason to suspect they may not know it.

 

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed! Then it would solve all such MI situations, saving director time, aggravation, etcetc.....

 

 

Seriously, where would you draw the line? Include stayman/transfers, nothing else? Jacoby? Two way checkback? Inverted minors? In any case, we're playing with players all around the world. Are you going to stop Polish players playing a Polish bidding system? English and New Zealand players from playing Acol? Chinese players from playing precision? Oh wait, SAYC is the only 'natural' system and everything else is 'artificial' and 'designed to confuse their opponents'. :)

[1eyedjack]

The line would be drawn by the TD at some arbitrary point according to his judgement. His judgement would not be unanimously popular and those who do not like it would vote with their feet. Those remaining may well have a more enjoyable and arguably fairer experience.

[helene_t]

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed! Then it would solve all such MI situations, saving director time, aggravation, etcetc.....

 

Seriously, where would you draw the line? Include stayman/transfers, nothing else? Jacoby?

I don't think formal rules about this are called for. ACBL tourneys follow the GCC, period. However, it is fair point IMHO that players should refrain from using conventions they cannot speedily explain in an understandable way. This is not about formal rules. It's just about good sportmanship.

[vuroth]

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them  accurately,concisely and speedilly.

 

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed!

I smell a strawman....

[jtfanclub]

However I am not convinced that the opponents were damaged. It seems they understood Kokish and they opening post clearly stated that the bid (2♥) was explained as being artificial.

Because if you read the links I put in my post, most people seem to agree that when playing Kokish.

 

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT

is balanced, and

 

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-anything else

shows hearts

[ArtK78]

However I am not convinced that the opponents were damaged.  It seems they understood Kokish and they opening post clearly stated that the bid (2♥) was explained as being artificial.

Because if you read the links I put in my post, most people seem to agree that when playing Kokish.

 

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT

is balanced, and

 

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-anything else

shows hearts

The 3NT rebid was alerted as showing 26-27 balanced. So the opponents were under no misconception about my showing or not showing hearts on the auction.

 

It is certainly not unreasonable at matchpoints to lead from T98xx of spades rather than K9xxx of hearts into a hand advertised as 26-27 HCP when neither major has been bid naturally.

 

In my first post, I said 24-26. That was an error.

[jtfanclub]

The 3NT rebid was alerted as showing 26-27 balanced. So the opponents were under no misconception about my showing or not showing hearts on the auction.

I apologize, I missed that completely.

 

I retract all earlier statements, and I would not adjust.

[skjaeran]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

B)

Nope, I just really think if you are ever going to play something artificial you should explain it in a clear and concise way. I think you failed to do that, and because of that your LHO did not lead a heart.

Well, he DID explain his 3NT rebid as 26-27 balanced.

 

How on earth could anyone adjust against him???

 

Either the TD didn't get what explanations were given, or the TD just wasn't up to the task of ruling. Luckily, there was no score adjustment.

 

As to the adjustment on the last board, this is hopeless.

The TD should know that it was he, not the players who was at fault for spending playing time. Secondly, he should have checked, and found out that it was the other pair who had used too much time on the previous board (assuming this is correct, of course).

[skjaeran]

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

 

B)

Nope, I just really think if you are ever going to play something artificial you should explain it in a clear and concise way. I think you failed to do that, and because of that your LHO did not lead a heart.

I agree a clearer explanation would have been better.

Having explained his 3NT rebid as 26-27 balanced, i fail to see how the explanation could have been better - in fact it was spot on!

 

I agree that the alert/explanation of 2♥ was clumsy.