Some basic questions

[Antrax]

I've recently started playing regularly at a club, and some very basic issues have been troubling me:

 

a) My partner and I play non-forcing stayman, meaning that after a 1NT opening, 2♣ can be made with a weak hand with 4-4 in the majors, and a 2♦ response is corrected to 2♥, which is expected to be passed with a 4-3 fit in hearts or corrected to 2♠ with a doubleton in hearts. It's not customary to alert "regular" stayman in our club, but it is customary to alert if stayman doesn't promise a four-card major. So, probably this treatment is alertable, but when do I alert it? At the time 2♣ is bid or only if responder corrects 2♦ to 2♥? Moreover, when asked why I'm alerting, is it enough to say "non-forcing stayman" or is further elaboration required? ("8+ HCP with four-card major or weak with 4-4 in the majors")

 

b) In the following auction: (p)-1♠-(p)-1NT (p)-3♦ I pulled out the stop card before the jump to 3♦. My LHO said "yeah, yeah" and quickly passed. Is the stop card supposed to protect the opposition or the bidding partnership? Is this something to call a TD over?

 

c) Is there any agreed on "table etiquette", similar to etiquette in other sports? Specifically, are comments about the pace of play or the expected outcome of the board acceptable while the board is being played?

[paulg]

Which country do you play in? (Alerting regulations and what people expect from an auction vary widely across the world)

[Antrax]

Israel, though from reading around it sounds like we mainly copy the ACBL.

[helene_t]

Whenever in doubt, alert. Especially when it comes to artificial bids like Stayman.

 

You shouldn't use convention names to explain what a bid means. Explain what hand types partner might have, beyond what opps expect. Assume that the concept "Stayman" is understood by everyone while the subtle differences between Stayman variants, such as forcing Stayman vs non-forcing Stayman, may not be. Then the proper explanation of non-forcing stayman is "stayman but could be a weak hand with both majors".

 

It is best to alert the 2♣ bid I think although it probably would do little harm to alert the 2♥ bid only. If you alert the 2♣ bid I don't think you need to alert the 2♥ bid.

[blackshoe]

Without knowing the actual alert regulations in force, it's impossible to say what should and should not be alerted. I would note that nothing in your first auction requires an alert under ACBL regulations.

 

Unfortunately, the Israeli Bridge Federation's website is in Hebrew, so I have no idea what Israeli regulations actually are.

 

The stop card is supposed to inform the opponents, particularly LHO, of the requirement for LHO to pause some ten seconds before calling. Failure to pause as required is a break in tempo, may convey unauthorized information, and if deemed to do so may constrain RHO's legal options in the bidding and play.

 

Extraneous comments during the play of a hand are to be avoided, as they can result in adverse rulings.

[dan_ehh]

Hi,

 

A. Stayman is an announcement in Israel as of about two years ago (maybe I'm mistaken about the timeline).

The announcement procedure specifically states that the 2♣ bidder's partner should say "Stayman" out loud, as long as standard Stayman responses are employed, regardless of the point count and/or major length promised by the bid.

So the answer to your first question is that your partner should not alert, he should say "Stayman", and when you bid 2♥ on your next bid he should alert and say "weak with at least 4-4 in the majors, asking me to choose".

 

It is my personal opinion that this procedure is flawed because many players will be surprised when the Stayman response will be passed out (regardless of whether it is 2♦, 2♥ or 2♠), but that's life.

 

B. Regarding the stop card, I would call the director in a serious tournament. You're playing in "just a club", though, so perhaps I'd comment on the pause requirement, and ask him to do better next time. If he responds negatively then I might call the director and ask to explain the rules.

I'd also like to add that the 10 second pause is useful to the jump bidder's partner as well, as he can plan further bidding while the opponent pauses. Failure to pause might negate claims of UI by the side who did not pause, if the jumper's partner takes a little longer to bid.

 

C. As blackshoe said, comments should generally be avoided. However, if someone plays very slowly, I think it's OK to ask them to hurry up a little bit (because we have another board to play). I wouldn't treat such a comment as UI.

 

 

Most important, the bottom line: remember that you live in Israel. We are rude, not polite.

[Flameous]

2) I think the general rules of using stop card should be seriously fixed. I think that requirement of stop after jumps in constructive auctions is somewhat ridiculous, while I think that it would be rather good to have stop used after each bid in competitive auctions. So in this sequence I wouldn't mind at all when opp just said yeah yeah and passed. (I don't even to bother to use stop, 1NT - stop 3NT really so meaningful pause! pass) If it happened after 3H opening, I'd feel different.

 

3) I think this is pretty much club dependent. In our club, we freely joke about hand while it's being played even though it might sometimes give some UI. (Though that UI might as well lead astray so they aren't taken seriously)

[nige1]

I think the general rules of using stop card should be seriously fixed. I think that requirement of stop after jumps in constructive auctions is somewhat ridiculous, while I think that it would be rather good to have stop used after each bid in competitive auctions. So in this sequence I wouldn't mind at all when opp just said yeah yeah and passed. (I don't even to bother to use stop, 1NT - stop 3NT really so meaningful pause! pass) If it happened after 3H opening, I'd feel different.

I agree that complete global bidding-box (and other) regulations should be in the law-book (as a default at least). I feel, however, that players who seem to flout them deliberately should be penalized.

I think this is pretty much club dependent. In our club, we freely joke about hand while it's being played even though it might sometimes give some UI. (Though that UI might as well lead astray so they aren't taken seriously)

In general, you should be po-faced while a board is in actual play. The problem with departing from the letter of the law is that when opponents take exception, the director must uphold the law. Unwillingly and unfairly, he may be cast in the role of kill-joy.

[hrothgar]

Flameous, on 2011-April-05, 16:47, said:

 

>> I think the general rules of using stop card should be seriously fixed. I think that requirement of stop

>> after jumps in constructive auctions is somewhat ridiculous, while I think that it would be rather good

>> to have stop used after each bid in competitive auctions. So in this sequence I wouldn't mind at all when

>> opp just said yeah yeah and passed. (I don't even to bother to use stop, 1NT - stop 3NT really so meaningful

>> pause! pass) If it happened after 3H opening, I'd feel different.

 

Nigel followed with

 

> I agree that complete global bidding-box (and other) regulations should be in the law-book

> (as a default at least). I feel, however, that players who seem to flout them deliberately should be penalized.

 

Flameous did not say any such thing.

Flameous suggested that the regulations need to be changed.

However, at no point in time did he make any claim that these regulations should be part of the Laws.

 

In all seriousness: You've hit the point where you can't read simple text without projecting your own inane theories onto other people's writing.

 

Many people have a romantic notion of Don Quixote, forgetting that Cervantes was portraying a man who suffered a serious psychotic break...

[nige1]

I think the general rules of using stop card should be seriously fixed. I think that requirement of stop after jumps in constructive auctions is somewhat ridiculous, while I think that it would be rather good to have stop used after each bid in competitive auctions. So in this sequence I wouldn't mind at all when opp just said yeah yeah and passed. (I don't even to bother to use stop, 1NT - stop 3NT really so meaningful pause! pass) If it happened after 3H opening, I'd feel different.

I agree that complete global bidding-box (and other) regulations should be in the law-book (as a default at least). I feel, however, that players who seem to flout them deliberately should be penalized.

I think this is pretty much club dependent. In our club, we freely joke about hand while it's being played even though it might sometimes give some UI. (Though that UI might as well lead astray so they aren't taken seriously)

In general, you should be po-faced while a board is in actual play. The problem with departing from the letter of the law is that when opponents take exception, the director must uphold the law. Unwillingly and unfairly, he may be cast in the role of kill-joy.

Flameous did not say any such thing. Flameous suggested that the regulations need to be changed. However, at no point in time did he make any claim that these regulations should be part of the Laws.

Perhaps I misinterpreted the word "fixed" but I do think that the rules should be improved (as well as made the same everywhere).

In all seriousness: You've hit the point where you can't read simple text without projecting your own inane theories onto other people's writing. Many people have a romantic notion of Don Quixote, forgetting that Cervantes was portraying a man who suffered a serious psychotic break.

I try to give credit where I think it's due.

[barmar]

It is my personal opinion that this procedure is flawed because many players will be surprised when the Stayman response will be passed out (regardless of whether it is 2♦, 2♥ or 2♠), but that's life.

I don't think anyone should be too surprised. I think that for almost as long as the Stayman convention has existed, it's been well known that with a weak hand and 4=4=5=0 shape you bid 3♣ and pass any response. You can also do it with nearby shapes like 4-3=5=1, and some will even risk it with 4=4=4=1.

 

The confusing auction is 1NT-2♣-2♦-2♥. Most people play that this shows a weak hand, but some play that it shows 4=5+ in the majors and opener is supposed to pass (responder was planning on passing a major response to Stayman), while others play "Creeping Stayman", where this shows 4-4 majors and opener is supposed to take preference to their 3-card suit. I'm not sure which of these are alertable in any particular jurisdictions. They're both natural, and again it shouldn't surprise anyone that they're not forcing.

 

With some of my regular partners I play that this sequence is an invitational form of Smolen -- that's clearly alertable.

 

When people refer to forcing vs. non-forcing Stayman, I think it refers to whether 2♣ is forcing to game. In my experience, this is mostly used with weak NT.

[Quantumcat]

It's not customary to alert "regular" stayman in our club, but it is customary to alert if stayman doesn't promise a four-card major.

If those are the rules there, then you must alert 2♣ every time. Same as people that play short club have to alert 1♣ everytime even though there's like a 1% chance it is going to actually be short.

The regulations where I am is that 1NT-2♣ is NEVER alerted no matter what it is. Even if it is a weak takeout to 2♣! I play 2♣ as a puppet to 2♦ to show any invitational hand, and 2♦ as stayman, and I am not allowed to alert it.

 

b) In the following auction: (p)-1♠-(p)-1NT (p)-3♦ I pulled out the stop card before the jump to 3♦. My LHO said "yeah, yeah" and quickly passed. Is the stop card supposed to protect the opposition or the bidding partnership? Is this something to call a TD over?

Yes, that is a breach of the rules, but it depends on whether the stop-card is taken seriously where you are. I've only ever seen it taken seriously in New Zealand, but never here. Whether it is taken seriosuly or not, you can call the director, but if it isn't taken seriously then the opponent wasn't giving anything away since he would always do that whenever a stop card is pulled out. It is supposed to protect both of you: the opposition from accidentally giving their partner UI by a slow or a quick pass, and you from being victim of UI. I think though that most people just wait patiently for the stop-card to be lifted and don't start their thinking until after that, so it doesn't actually achieve anything.

 

c) Is there any agreed on "table etiquette", similar to etiquette in other sports? Specifically, are comments about the pace of play or the expected outcome of the board acceptable while the board is being played?

It's expected to keep an even tempo of play. Thinking too long can cause UI if it is reasonable that the partner can figure out what is being thought about. Comments about the expected outcome of a board are a definite no-no. As declarer, it may rattle the opponents, and if your comment is not true, then that might be construed as deliberately misleading even if you just made a mistake on your assessment. As a defender, anything you say about the board could be construed as telling your partner what is going on so you can't do that.

[Quantumcat]

The announcement procedure specifically states that the 2♣ bidder's partner should say "Stayman" out loud, as long as standard Stayman responses are employed, regardless of the point count and/or major length promised by the bid.

lol, that is ridiculous. That is the opposite of the point of bidding, which is transferring information only by the bids you make and nothing else.

It is not allowed to explain your partner's bid unless the opposition ask.

 

So the answer to your first question is that your partner should not alert, he should say "Stayman", and when you bid 2♥ on your next bid he should alert and say "weak with at least 4-4 in the majors, asking me to choose".

What is even the point of bidding at all? You may as well announce your shape and your points to your partner, then decide on the best contract out loud.

 

It is my personal opinion that this procedure is flawed because many players will be surprised when the Stayman response will be passed out (regardless of whether it is 2♦, 2♥ or 2♠), but that's life.

If they don't ask, it's too bad for them. They should know 2♣ is never alerted whatever it is, and if they want to know, they should have asked (or looked at their convention card).

[Vampyr]

lol, that is ridiculous. That is the opposite of the point of bidding, which is transferring information only by the bids you make and nothing else.

It is not allowed to explain your partner's bid unless the opposition ask.

 

 

What is even the point of bidding at all? You may as well announce your shape and your points to your partner, then decide on the best contract out loud.

 

 

In England we have had announcements for several years, and they seem to work well.

[Vampyr]

Duplicate posts is the least of my problems when using my sister's MacBook.

[Antrax]

Unfortunately, the Israeli Bridge Federation's website is in Hebrew, so I have no idea what Israeli regulations actually are.

I can see how you'd think it's in Hebrew, but it's in fact in Legalese. I tried reading the regulations and honestly couldn't figure it out.

 

Thanks dan_ehh and all. I'm actually a bit surprised it's acceptable to tell people to play faster, but then again, I'm not entirely sure I understand how time limits work in Bridge tournaments.

[Antrax]

Actually, I'd like to append one question: since I'm a relatively new player, it sometimes happens my partner makes bids which mean nothing to me. What should I answer when opponents inquire what it means? (in Israel there are no alerts above 3NT, so there's no issue whether to alert those mysterious calls or not)

[paulg]

Actually, I'd like to append one question: since I'm a relatively new player, it sometimes happens my partner makes bids which mean nothing to me. What should I answer when opponents inquire what it means? (in Israel there are no alerts above 3NT, so there's no issue whether to alert those mysterious calls or not)

Reading what Dan has written previously, I expect you are supposed to say, "you have as much idea as I have, probably more". :)

 

In other jurisdictions, we normally say "no agreement" or, in a friendly club game, "I'm fairly new to the game and I have no idea". This can even apply when you alert a bid that must be artificial, such as (1C) Pass (2C) 3C, even though you have no idea what it means.

 

In my world newbies are given a lot of slack when it comes to alerting. Just try and enjoy the game!

[Antrax]

"I don't know" isn't very helpful though - obviously I'm going to assume something about the bid, don't the opponents get to know what it is? (granted, usually I assume it's natural, and when it couldn't be I just shut my eyes and repeat my suit, but still)

[dan_ehh]

Barmar,

 

I don't know what is your definition of "well known", but I assure you that many LOLs in the club will never expect this bidding sequence:

1NT-Pass-2♣-Pass-2♦/2♥/2♠-Pass-Pass?!?

(But stayman promises at least 8 points, doesn't it?)

 

 

Quantumcat,

 

I suggest reading and inquiring more before making such uninformed comments and observations.

Additionally, I suggest improving your forum etiquette.

 

Lastly, I think your signature is brilliant.

 

 

 

Antrax,

Time is limited in Bridge. If you need to play two boards in 15 minutes, and declarer takes 10 minutes before he plays from dummy after the opening lead on the first board, something is not right here. Commenting is not ideal, but what else can you do?

 

Also, what paulg said is true. If you don't know what partner's bid means, you should say "I don't know" or "we don't have an agreement". True, it is not very helpful to the opponents, but that's just too bad for them.

You are under no obligation to tell them what you assume the bid to mean. In fact you are under an obligation not to say so, because that is UI for your partner.

 

Also, I have a question for you: which club is it that you play in, where they blatantly ignore the announcement procedure?

[paulg]

Barmar,

 

I don't know what is your definition of "well known", but I assure you that many LOLs in the club will never expect this bidding sequence:

1NT-Pass-2♣-Pass-2♦/2♥/2♠-Pass-Pass?!?

(But stayman promises at least 8 points, doesn't it?)

This does highlight how different bridge can be around the world even on the simplest of auctions. In the UK I would expect to find that every LOL in the club had passed a Stayman response recently.

[NickRW]

"I don't know" isn't very helpful though - obviously I'm going to assume something about the bid, don't the opponents get to know what it is? (granted, usually I assume it's natural, and when it couldn't be I just shut my eyes and repeat my suit, but still)

 

If "I don't know" or "no agreement" is the truth, then, whether it is helpful or not, it is the only answer your opponents are entitled to from you. Saying what you think it means or how you're going to interpret it, far from being helpful, is giving UI to your partner.

 

Opponents are entitled to know anything they care to ask about your agreements pertinent to the auction in question, including any negative inferences that may be available by partner's failure to use other options. But that is the limit of what they are entitled to know. In other words they are entitled to know what you know about the agreement, nothing else.

 

If you know that a bid is artificial or has some unexpected meaning, but have forgotten the agreement, then you alert or announce as appropriate, and if the opponents ask you say "I don't know", they are entitled to have the explanation from partner with you away from the table. But even in this case they are only entitled to know the agreement, not whether partner may have psyched or deviated or any other "helpful" comment. And, indeed, if it is, say, obviously forcing, but an undiscussed sequence that has never come up, all they are entitled to from partner under these circumstances is a further "no agreement".

 

Nick

[Antrax]

I play in Avivim. The club is not the problem, I just go to the beginners' competitions where the players are very lax, probably because their understanding of the rules is about as firm as my own :)

Thanks all.

[blackshoe]

I'm not entirely sure I understand how time limits work in Bridge tournaments.

 

You will hear "bridge is a timed event", and so it is — up to a point. The laws specify that the round ends for a table when the director signals the move, except that if a board is still in progress at some table(s), the round does not end for those tables until the players move (after the board is finished). There are no specific time limits in the laws, other than this. There is guidance, which may be enshrined in regulation in some places, that players should have usually approximately 7.5 minutes to complete a board, but generally this is guidance only, not a hard and fast rule (although some players and some TDs treat it as such).

[Quantumcat]

"I don't know" isn't very helpful though - obviously I'm going to assume something about the bid, don't the opponents get to know what it is? (granted, usually I assume it's natural, and when it couldn't be I just shut my eyes and repeat my suit, but still)

 

The opponents might not like it, but you are required to say so if you don't think you have an agreement about the bid. The reason is, if you state what you are going to interpret it as, that will be telling your partner what you think it is. If the opponents start pressuring you to tell them what it means, call a director. He will be on your side and will tell them to lay off you!

 

Also, it might be good to learn which bids are "self-alerting". You shouldn't ever get into trouble for alerting too much, but at least you can relax knowing no matter what it means you don't need to alert it. These bids include bids of the opponent's suit, all doubles, 2♣ after a 1NT opening, and a 2♣ opening bid. There are probably others.

 

 

Quantumcat,

 

I suggest reading and inquiring more before making such uninformed comments and observations.

Additionally, I suggest improving your forum etiquette.

 

Lastly, I think your signature is brilliant.

I thought it was an April fool's joke to start with. I apologise for being rude. But if those really are the regulations, I don't know how Israel could possibly host an international tournament? There must be a hundred conflicts with international bridge rules.

 

Thanks for the compliment. If you ever play in an Australian national you might see two ex-youth bridge plyers wandering around with it emblazoned on their t-shirts :-) (actually they thought of it independently).

 

Antrax,

Time is limited in Bridge. If you need to play two boards in 15 minutes, and declarer takes 10 minutes before he plays from dummy after the opening lead on the first board, something is not right here. Commenting is not ideal, but what else can you do?

In a club game, the director would stop you from starting a board if there are only a certain number of minutes left, and he should decide which pair is at fault, then award a 60% score to the non-offending side and a 40% score to the offending side (or different proportions depending how he feels).

In a teams game, the director shouldn't let them play any boards when there is only a certain number of minutes left, and they are not counted in the score. The offending side will be fined some IMPs (the number per board should be decided on before the first match and published, so the director isn't being unfair to someone who didn't know there would be a fine for slow play).

There isn't any need to comment on slow play or to try to hurry people up, because if they cause you to not be able to play a board, you won't be damaged by it. And because you won't be damaged, trying to hurry people up will only upset them and won't cause any benefit to you, so you shouldn't do it.