qwery_hi Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 ACBL. So the auction is over, and I have some questions regarding style (e.g. can 1N be rebid with a singleton in responder's suit?) and perhaps about the bids.Do I have to select my opening lead and then ask questions, or can I ask the questions and then select the lead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 Ask, then select. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwery_hi Posted July 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 ok, thanks. So best practice would be 1. Ask your questions, if any,2. Make the lead face down, 3. Ask partner if he has any questions4. Lead face up Ask, then select. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 ok, thanks. So best practice would be 1. Ask your questions, if any,2. Make the lead face down, 3. Ask partner if he has any questions4. Lead face up Yes. BTW, declarer also has the right to ask questions before the lead is faced. B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevek Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 I don't like your example much.If we go 1♦ - 1♠ - 1NT - end I wouldn't be happy to hear the leader ask whether I can have a stiff spade. Sure I can.Sounds like the question might be based on a good spade holding. Just lead and wait till you - and only you - really need to know. In the endgame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwery_hi Posted July 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 You have a valid point. Previously, I used to worry whether any questions I ask might piss off the opponents. Nowadays, I ask if I think I need to know, and let the director or the appeals committee deal with all the implications if opponents complain. Another auction where I would like to know is 1c - 1d - 1N - As the opening leader, I would like to know if 1N could contain one or both majors. I don't like your example much.If we go 1♦ - 1♠ - 1NT - end I wouldn't be happy to hear the leader ask whether I can have a stiff spade. Sure I can.Sounds like the question might be based on a good spade holding. Just lead and wait till you - and only you - really need to know. In the endgame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 Another auction where I would like to know is 1c - 1d - 1N - As the opening leader, I would like to know if 1N could contain one or both majors. I tend to alert in that auction, but Walsh is not as common here as in the ACBL, I think. If that's all very much unalertable then it's certainly reasonable to ask about it right away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 I wouldn't be happy to hear the leader ask whether I can have a stiff spade. Sure I can.Not everyone agrees with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 You can ask "tell me about your style", and if 1NT can be rebid with a stiff spade, that should be mentioned. Under ACBL regs, the onus is on the pair explaining their methods to fully disclose all pertinent information — the opponents do not have to ask specific questions. If the explanation leaves out something pertinent, that is MI, and the NOS are entitled to redress if it damages them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 I don't like your example much.If we go 1♦ - 1♠ - 1NT - end I wouldn't be happy to hear the leader ask whether I can have a stiff spade. Sure I can.Sounds like the question might be based on a good spade holding. Just lead and wait till you - and only you - really need to know. In the endgame.I might need to know immediately looking at KJ109x, as I might consider leading the K if stiff Q is possible for opener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevek Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 Not everyone agrees with that. I reckon every man & his dog rebids 1NT with ♠6 ♥AKJ5 ♦J875 ♣K942 Maybe catlovers bid 2♣. Don't know. Certainly those who opened 1♣ have zero choice.Sure, the opening leader and dummy can have a long chat about hands like this and whether ♠Q would swing it but no useful purpose is served. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwery_hi Posted July 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 Good to know... I think I'm going to do this from now on. You can ask "tell me about your style", and if 1NT can be rebid with a stiff spade, that should be mentioned. Under ACBL regs, the onus is on the pair explaining their methods to fully disclose all pertinent information — the opponents do not have to ask specific questions. If the explanation leaves out something pertinent, that is MI, and the NOS are entitled to redress if it damages them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 In an English club about 10% of players will rebid 1NT with a stiff spade: in events it may be 25%. It is common for it to guarantee a balanced hand. But the idea of not being allowed to ask is anathema, and I do not see it. I like to know about the opponents' methods in detail when defending so I always ask a number of questions at the start of the play. Why should anyone not like this? I can see nothing wrong with it. It gives nothing away and misleads nobody. Incidentally, Ed, in answer to a question about a 1NT rebid I have heard an answer as to whether a stiff is possible only from two people: myself and my partner. No opponent has ever told me - that is never in my whole life - without a supplementary question. So I might just as well skip the preliminaries and ask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 ok, thanks. So best practice would be 1. Ask your questions, if any,2. Make the lead face down, 3. Ask partner if he has any questions4. Lead face up You can easily skip Step 3. Partner has a chance to ask questions when it is his/her turn to play to first trick. Besides, once your lead is face down, you are not allowed to change your lead to something else so whether partner has questions or not, does not affect your actions and surely it is only more helpful to partner to ask any questions when dummy is in sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 It is normal enough to ask questions when partner has led face down, and skipping step 3 is merely rude. Furthermore, that is how opening leads out of turn get faced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted July 1, 2011 Report Share Posted July 1, 2011 ok, thanks. So best practice would be 1. Ask your questions, if any, 2. Make the lead face down, 3. Ask partner if he has any questions 4. Lead face up You can easily skip Step 3. Partner has a chance to ask questions when it is his/her turn to play to first trick. Besides, once your lead is face down, you are not allowed to change your lead to something else so whether partner has questions or not, does not affect your actions and surely it is only more helpful to partner to ask any questions when dummy is in sight. Sorry - NO - Step 3 is important as well ! ! ! If as a consequence of partner's question(s) misinformation from (presumed) declaring side is revealed then the face down opening lead may be retracted. the auction rolled back and continued as specified in Laws 21 and 41. It is then even possible for the originally presumed declaring side to eventually become the defending side as a result of such rectification. This option is no longer available once the opening lead is faced. But you should not ask partner if he has any questions; the correct procedure is to just wait for your partner to give permission to face your opening lead. Now why is this so important? At least in theory your asking might possibly convey UI to your partner, it may for instance be taken as a suggestion for him to ask questions. The correct procedure as described in Law 41 is to simply leave the initiative to your partner and await his signal that you may face your opening lead. (I have no count of all the times I have experienced declarer or dummy nodding "yes" to LHO when he has placed his opening lead face down on the table. Apparently they believe the purpose of the procedure is to avoid an opening lead from the wrong defender and they nod as confirmation "yes, it is your lead". This is none of their business - it is the other defender who shall indicate that he has no more questions to ask so now is the time to face the opening lead.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwery_hi Posted July 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 Where can I find a (preferably online) text of Law 41? Sorry - NO - Step 3 is important as well ! ! ! If as a consequence of partner's question(s) misinformation from (presumed) declaring side is revealed then the face down opening lead may be retracted. the auction rolled back and continued as specified in Laws 21 and 41. It is then even possible for the originally presumed declaring side to eventually become the defending side as a result of such rectification. This option is no longer available once the opening lead is faced. But you should not ask partner if he has any questions; the correct procedure is to just wait for your partner to give permission to face your opening lead. Now why is this so important? At least in theory your asking might possibly convey UI to your partner, it may for instance be taken as a suggestion for him to ask questions. The correct procedure as described in Law 41 is to simply leave the initiative to your partner and await his signal that you may face your opening lead. (I have no count of all the times I have experienced declarer or dummy nodding "yes" to LHO when he has placed his opening lead face down on the table. Apparently they believe the purpose of the procedure is to avoid an opening lead from the wrong defender and they nod as confirmation "yes, it is your lead". This is none of their business - it is the other defender who shall indicate that he has no more questions to ask so now is the time to face the opening lead.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 http://www.worldbridge.org/departments/laws/internationalcode/law41.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 (About whether 1♣-1♦-1NT can contain 4-card majors) I tend to alert in that auction, but Walsh is not as common here as in the ACBL, I think. If that's all very much unalertable then it's certainly reasonable to ask about it right away. I don't understand this quite. Do you alert if you CAN have 4-card majors or if you can't? In most bidding philosophies, and this will come up more with 5-card majors, opener is not permitted to rebid 1M with a balanced hand. So 4-card majors are always possible, and definitely not alertable. Sorry - NO - Step 3 is important as well ! ! ! Not only for the reasons Sven mentions, but also third hand might want to ask about the auction while the bidding cards are still out, especially if the auction has been long. Also, of course, he may want to ask about inferences in the bidding before declarer has been influenced by seeing dummy's hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 But you should not ask partner if he has any questions; the correct procedure is to just wait for your partner to give permission to face your opening lead. Now why is this so important? At least in theory your asking might possibly convey UI to your partner, it may for instance be taken as a suggestion for him to ask questions. The correct procedure as described in Law 41 is to simply leave the initiative to your partner and await his signal that you may face your opening lead. (I have no count of all the times I have experienced declarer or dummy nodding "yes" to LHO when he has placed his opening lead face down on the table. Apparently they believe the purpose of the procedure is to avoid an opening lead from the wrong defender and they nod as confirmation "yes, it is your lead". This is none of their business - it is the other defender who shall indicate that he has no more questions to ask so now is the time to face the opening lead.) Perhaps that's how you do things in Norway, Sven. In North America everybody asks partner if he has any questions before facing the opening lead, and nobody thinks this conveys UI. Well, nobody I've ever run across anyway. And both procedures are flawed, since declarer is also entitled to ask questions before the lead is faced. Where can I find a (preferably online) text of Law 41? Downloadable pdf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 Perhaps that's how you do things in Norway, Sven. In North America everybody asks partner if he has any questions before facing the opening lead, and nobody thinks this conveys UI. Well, nobody I've ever run across anyway. And both procedures are flawed, since declarer is also entitled to ask questions before the lead is faced. If that is so then "everybody" is wrong. 1. Is unnessary 2. This question is not permitted by L41 which gives players a right to ask question but not a right to enquire whether partner has any questions 3. Is contrary to L73 which allows communication between partners only by calls and plays made It seems this does not cause problems but it must be better to follow proper procedure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 The ACBL has about 162,000 members, I think. If you want to take on the job of teaching them they're all wrong, be my guest. Me, I think tilting at windmills would be more productive. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 I suppose that if the only correct procedure is to wait, without comment, for instruction from the people (both of them) who are entitled to ask questions before turning over the opening lead, that I shall have to start doing that. I'll predict that within a very short period of time, people will be calling the director and accusing me of sundry nastiness. Or maybe of just being a jerk. They might even be justified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 I tend to alert in that auction, but Walsh is not as common here as in the ACBL, I think. If that's all very much unalertable then it's certainly reasonable to ask about it right away.Yes, the opponents should be given this information up-front and not be burdened with the concern about whether their question about bypassing a 4-card major would give UI. I reckon every man & his dog rebids 1NT with ♠6 ♥AKJ5 ♦J875 ♣K942 Every man and his dog who don't have a prepared opening to show this pattern and strength might be tempted to rebid 1NT; but I don't believe rebidding 1NT would be a majority choice anyway. And, about third hand inquiries during the face-down period: Not only for the reasons Sven mentions, but also third hand might want to ask about the auction while the bidding cards are still out, especially if the auction has been long. Also, of course, he may want to ask about inferences in the bidding before declarer has been influenced by seeing dummy's hand. This is often important when declarer has based his/her final decision about strain and level upon what responder has allegedly shown in the auction. The question is really, "What are you expecting to see in dummy?"; not, about what we all will see in a few seconds. From the answer we can deduce whether declarer has made a choice based on faulty information, and defend accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjj29 Posted July 2, 2011 Report Share Posted July 2, 2011 If that is so then "everybody" is wrong. 1. Is unnessary 2. This question is not permitted by L41 which gives players a right to ask question but not a right to enquire whether partner has any questions 3. Is contrary to L73 which allows communication between partners only by calls and plays made It seems this does not cause problems but it must be better to follow proper procedure.It may be unneccessary, but so is saying 'good luck partner' when putting down dummy and 'thank you partner' when I'm declaring - it's just one of those things you do that's generally polite. If you prefer I could say "may I have permission to lead". I could just sit in silence waiting for some pronouncement from the rest of the table, but I'm not sure what my partner will do given that I'm also, presumably, not allowed to know that my partner didn't have any questions... It doesn't transmit any UI, and even if it did that's not illegal. L73 clearly doesn't apply - I'm not trying to communicate anything about the hand to partner, it's just part of the normal polite workings of the bridge game. And yes, everyone in the EBU does it too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.