Keep those bidding cards out!

[Echognome]

One suggestion I have for the ACBL is to not immediately put the bidding cards back in the box after the final pass. It seems so much more sensible to me to leave them out in case there are any questions either by opening leader or opening leader's partner.

 

I know people can remember what happened during the auction if they try, but how much time is saved by putting the cards away right away?

 

What do you think?

[jdonn]

People tend to leave them out either when they have had a long or complicated auction or when their opponents ask them to anyway. It does save a little time to put them away right away since there is nothing else to do when the opening leader is thinking.

[jjbrr]

If I have a long auction and I can see the opponents bouncing their heads back and forth trying to remember everything, I just tell them I'll leave the bids out until they make a lead.

 

I'm not certain it's best to mandate the practice, because I agree with jdonn, but common sense suggests that sometimes people should do it anyway.

[blackshoe]

Last time I asked somebody to keep the bidding cards out, he put them away, then looked at me and said "huh?" :unsure:

[campboy]

The EBU does require the cards to be left out (OB 7B7), which I find helpful. I am not sure I had noticed the precise wording before, but as a pedant I appreciate it adding that they can be put back immediately if the board was passed out :unsure:

[Mbodell]

I like this for explanation because if the partner of the opening leader has questions even saying "please leave the bidding cards out" before the lead can transmit UI or lead to feelings that UI might be being transmitted to the opening leader.

 

Also, the other nice side effect, is that it stops the bad habit of the turbo tap or the second person to pass just picking up their bids instead of passing. It seems like at least once a week I have an auction where my opponents want to assume the auction is over but I want to double or sac and they start picking up the auction assuming the auction is done before it is.

 

So you sort of get a 2 for 1 benefit of adopting the leave the bidding cards out until the opening lead is faced. Of course, if you don't use bidding cards but instead write the auction out on paper that would work too to preserve the auction.

[paulg]

When we play in the NABCs and leave our bidding cards on the table, our opponents wait a decent time and then note that the auction is over and we can put them away. When we explain that this is how it's done in the UK, and we are waiting for the lead, they say that seems a really good idea.

 

A couple of more lawyerly people have said that there was an ACBL rule that they should be left out, but no-one ever does. I have not found such rule after a quick scan, but my feeling is that it would need a horrendous number of PPs to convince ACBL players to change. A bit like trying to make everyone use the Stop card.

 

Paul

[Vampyr]

It does save a little time to put them away right away since there is nothing else to do when the opening leader is thinking.

Does it? Can't people use the time that the dummy is using to table his hand?

[helene_t]

In England and Denmark we let the bidding cards stay on table until the opening lead has been faced up and I think that is a very good. The auction hasn't ended before the opening lead has been faced up because declarer still might correct the explanation of a call so that the last opp to pass can make a call.

 

In the Netherlands they don't do it and it sucks, especially because a lot of club players put their bidding cards back in the box as soon as they think the auction is going to end. Then the auction proceeds and people have to take the bidding cards back to the table and reconstruct the auction, and start asking questions about how the auction went, while it still hasn't ended.

 

I don't think it saves any time, either. When dummy has been tabled everyone needs some time to think anyway and that is great time to put the bidding cards back.

[Trinidad]

In England and Denmark we let the bidding cards stay on table until the opening lead has been faced up and I think that is a very good. The auction hasn't ended before the opening lead has been faced up because declarer still might correct the explanation of a call so that the last opp to pass can make a call.

 

In the Netherlands they don't do it and it sucks, especially because a lot of club players put their bidding cards back in the box as soon as they think the auction is going to end. Then the auction proceeds and people have to take the bidding cards back to the table and reconstruct the auction, and start asking questions about how the auction went, while it still hasn't ended.

 

I don't think it saves any time, either. When dummy has been tabled everyone needs some time to think anyway and that is great time to put the bidding cards back.

The regulation in The Netherlands is that the bidding cards should stay on the table. In practice, nobody follows this regulation.

 

Rik

[blackshoe]

"Off with their heads!" — the Red Queen, in Alice in Wonderland :)

[jdonn]

It does save a little time to put them away right away since there is nothing else to do when the opening leader is thinking.

Does it? Can't people use the time that the dummy is using to table his hand?

That's time you could spend thinking about dummy.

[jeremy69]

That's time you could spend thinking about dummy.

 

Men, of course, can multitask and manage both to think and also to put their bidding cards away!

[jdonn]

That's time you could spend thinking about dummy.

 

Men, of course, can multitask and manage both to think and also to put their bidding cards away!

Sounds like the same type of men who think they drive just as well when they are on the cell phone.

[blackshoe]

Actually, they probably do. Idiots. :P

[debrose]

When we play in the NABCs and leave our bidding cards on the table, our opponents wait a decent time and then note that the auction is over and we can put them away. When we explain that this is how it's done in the UK, and we are waiting for the lead, they say that seems a really good idea.

 

A couple of more lawyerly people have said that there was an ACBL rule that they should be left out, but no-one ever does. I have not found such rule after a quick scan, but my feeling is that it would need a horrendous number of PPs to convince ACBL players to change. A bit like trying to make everyone use the Stop card.

 

Paul

I've possibly been one of those opponents who has commented on what a good idea this seems to be. Whenever I tell any of my students, most of whom are club players, that this is done in the UK, they love the idea and wonder why not here.

As Paul mentioned, it seems awfully tough to get ACBL players to change anything, but the first step would be a rule. Can anyone (Jan Martel?) direct us as to the best place to write letters requesting this type of rule change?

[JanM]

I think this would be a matter for the ACBL Laws Commission. The last time I responded to a post on here by asking the Laws Commission about it & they actually did something about the problem, they were roundly criticized by forum members, http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=37766&st=90, but sucker that I am, I'll ask about this.

 

You can find a list of Laws Commission members at http://www.acbl.org/about/lawsCommissionMembers.html if you want to contact any of them directly.

[JanM]

Chip tells me that leaving the bidding cards out would be a matter of ACBL regulation, not ACBL laws, and therefore the right committee to contact is C&C. You can see a list of C&C members here. You can email C&C at candc@acbl.org.

[blackshoe]

It is in the nature of such things that whatever "solution" is taken by TPTB, somebody won't like it. :blink:

 

I kind of thought the C&C might be the right place. B)

[blackshoe]

Heh. I just re-read the regulation. I find this part mildly amusing:

A call is considered made when a bidding card is removed from the bidding box and held touching or nearly touching the table or maintained in such a position to indicate that the call has been made.We should use unauthorized information where reasonably appropriate (where we can rule that a bid has not been made).

The emphasis is mine, and is the funny part. Of course, what they almost certainly (I'm not a mind reader) mean is that TDs should remind the partner of a player who has not quite made a bid that he should not use UI, but... B)

 

The other thing I noticed was this:

Except when screens are in use, a player must say "Alert" out loud when tapping the alert strip of the bidding box.

To which my reaction is mostly "what alert strip?" :blink: (People tend not to put them in their little slot in the bidding box, even when they're available).

[nige1]

In England and Denmark we let the bidding cards stay on table until the opening lead has been faced up and I think that is a very good. The auction hasn't ended before the opening lead has been faced up because declarer still might correct the explanation of a call so that the last opp to pass can make a call.

IMO basic rules about bidding boxes (like the Denmark/UK rules) should be included in the law-book, itself. A useful default, although, as for other laws, chauvinistic regulators would be allowed concoct local variations to keep foreigners at a disadvantage.

[barmar]

The other thing I noticed was this:

Except when screens are in use, a player must say "Alert" out loud when tapping the alert strip of the bidding box.

To which my reaction is mostly "what alert strip?" B) (People tend not to put them in their little slot in the bidding box, even when they're available).

Lots of people actively take the strip out of the slot, because they find that it gets in the way of pulling bidding cards out of the box. I don't have this problem myself (I think it has to do with how you position the box, and maybe the length of your arm), and actually find that the alert strip sitting diagonally in the box, and sticking out the side as a result, gets in the way, so I always put it back IN the slot.

 

What many people do when the alert strip isn't in its slot is that they pull the strip out of the box and tap it on the table. Also, most bidding boxes also have an Alert card, and taking the card out and displaying it prominently is considered equivalent to tapping the strip. The spirit of the regulation is that you're required to do something something audible (say "alert") and something visible (tap or display the alert strip or card) to ensure that the opponents are aware of the alert. Any reasonable and obvious substitute for tapping the alert strip is considered acceptable.

[Vampyr]

IMO basic rules about bidding boxes (like the Denmark/UK rules) should be included in the law-book, itself. A useful default, although, as for other laws, chauvinistic regulators would be allowed concoct local variations to keep foreigners at a disadvantage.

There already is a useful default, in the WBF General Conditions of Contest. This includes when a call is considered made and how to use the Alert and Stop cards. It doesn't, however, include instruction on when the bidding cards should be removed. It is possible to correct this omission.

 

You frequently say, Nigel, that there should be a "useful default" in the Law book, but the WBF regulations exist, and some countries use them.

 

To me, it seems better to have regulations to do with bidding systems and general practice in the WBF CofC than enshrined in the Laws, because the former is more flexible and can adapt more easily to changes in technology or discovery of more effective practice.

 

Can you please explain why you think that it is so terrible to have these regulations available in the WBF's documents instead of in the Laws? And would you please stop saying that there is not a worldwide default, because there is.

 

As has been mentioned before, people who go off to play in foreign tournaments will nearly always be people who are quite capable of finding out about, and adapting to, the destination bridge culture. Sure, I have gotten things wrong in international play, but I would not expect, or want, the foreign bridge regulations to be adapted to suit me when I visit, instead of suiting the people who play there all the time.

 

If you have had negative experiences in international play, I sympathise, but I really do think that such experiences are the exception rather than the rule. Give it another try, and you might be pleasantly surprised.

[nige1]

IMO basic rules about bidding boxes (like the Denmark/UK rules) should be included in the law-book, itself. A useful default, although, as for other laws, chauvinistic regulators would be allowed concoct local variations to keep foreigners at a disadvantage.

There already is a useful default, in the WBF General Conditions of Contest. This includes when a call is considered made and how to use the Alert and Stop cards. It doesn't, however, include instruction on when the bidding cards should be removed. It is possible to correct this omission.

You frequently say, Nigel, that there should be a "useful default" in the Law book, but the WBF regulations exist, and some countries use them. To me, it seems better to have regulations to do with bidding systems and general practice in the WBF CofC than enshrined in the Laws, because the former is more flexible and can adapt more easily to changes in technology or discovery of more effective practice. Can you please explain why you think that it is so terrible to have these regulations available in the WBF's documents instead of in the Laws? And would you please stop saying that there is not a worldwide default, because there is. As has been mentioned before, people who go off to play in foreign tournaments will nearly always be people who are quite capable of finding out about, and adapting to, the destination bridge culture. Sure, I have gotten things wrong in international play, but I would not expect, or want, the foreign bridge regulations to be adapted to suit me when I visit, instead of suiting the people who play there all the time. If you have had negative experiences in international play, I sympathise, but I really do think that such experiences are the exception rather than the rule. Give it another try, and you might be pleasantly surprised.

I'm Scottish. Scotland is an enlightened jurisdiction that is trying to adopt WBF conditions of contest. It works well and I wish more countries would follow our good example. Problems arise, of course, where the WBF Coc is geared to international competition with expert players and, as Vampyr points out, does not cover common situations that arise in ordinary play without screens. In any case, it is a separate document and legislators have to opt in to it. I wish there were a single comprehensive book of rules to provide a level playing field for play in most countries. Although Bolshy chauvinistic legislators could still opt out of it.

[bluejak]

Also, of course, legislators who do not agree with you.

 

For example, one of the reasons I do not like playing in Scotland as much as I did is because of the dreadful alerting rules. It is not a matter of being bolshy: it is a matter of Scotland getting them wrong.