Taking Back a Bid

[Nu2Br]

In recent BBO play opponent mis-bid and a message popped up asking to allow an undo. How was this generated? Used for mis-played cards as well? Any particular protocol (if my partner and I have different opinions) in responding?

[jillybean]

In recent BBO play opponent mis-bid and a message popped up asking to allow an undo. How was this generated? Used for mis-played cards as well? Any particular protocol (if my partner and I have different opinions) in responding?

There is an undo button to request a withdrawl your last call or played card. There is no set protocol for using the option. In tournaments the option is often unavailable or restricted to bidding misclicks only, at tables it is less formal and left for your opponents to allow the undo, or the host may set a rule for the table.

[blackshoe]

There are laws that apply to "undos", even in on-line bridge. Mostly, they're ignored. :ph34r:

[Bbradley62]

Do both opponents have to agree to the undo, similar to both agreeing to a claim?

[jillybean]

There are laws that apply to "undos", even in on-line bridge. Mostly, they're ignored. :ph34r:

 

Very few people follow any of the laws online :( And I have given up & stopped preaching.

[diana_eva]

Do both opponents have to agree to the undo, similar to both agreeing to a claim?

 

Yes, both have to agree.

[Zelandakh]

Undos are requested by one of the players at a table. They should only be used for misclicks but many players take liberties with this. The BBO rules say that you should not take offence if an opponents refuses your misclick but most are granted in my experience. If someone requests a bidding undo then you should always grant this if it was a misclick. If you are not sure then it is OK to ask them. If they are asking for an undo because they realise that they made a bad call then you have to decide how "friendly" you want the table to be. There are often UI issues after this so it is often best to simply redeal.

 

For the opening lead it is really not possible to have an undo unless you know the person involved that they have definitely misclicked and will not change their mind having seen the dummy. This is the one case where you should be wary of giving permission. For other cards you apply the same principles as in the bidding. If someone takes a finesse and loses you should be very skeptical about giving an undo. If someone makes an obviously silly discard then you should assume a misclick and accept. Where you are unsure you can ask, or if feeling "friendly" just accept.

 

Occasionally you come across players that say "no undos, ever", or "no undos during play" or somesuch. This is actually wrong - you are entitled to an undo for a misclick in exactly the same way as having the wrong bid fall out of your bidding box - but you just have to decide if it matters to you or not. If it does then there are plenty of alternative opponents and you should not feel bad about refusing such a player from sitting at your table, or of choosing not to sit at theirs.

[billw55]

The unfortunate reality is that a significant portion of undo requests are by players who want to change their mind, rather than players who genuinely misclicked. For genuine misclicks I would want to grant the undo; but there are so many of the other kind that it is difficult to tell. Of course, almost 100% of undo requests are described as misclicks, so asking doesn't really help.

 

There are a few common false misclick situations. One comes from the player who is planning a particular action, and makes that action in haste, not realizing that the intervening action by the opponent makes a difference. These are not misclicks: the player was intending that play when he made it, so it should stand. For example, declarer leads a small card toward Axxx in dummy, and defender unexpectedly ruffs. Declarer, in a rush, clicks the ace anyway. I refuse the ensuing undo request.

 

Then there are the withdrawn bids, replaced by a bid that is not close to the original bid, and could not reasonably have been a misclick. Or the withdrawn lead from dummy, replaced by a lead in a different suit (!).

 

It is an unfortunate plague that is peculiar to online bridge. None of these ruses stand a chance at a club game.

[kenberg]

I accept most requests, I seldom ask for one myself. Really, unless you have some nerve or muscular disorder, how often do you really misclick?

 

The most extreme request was from a guy who led small from the dummy to his ace. I ruffed the ace and he asked for an undo. That one I rejected. As I recall, he left in a huff.

 

I ask so seldom that when the occasional real misclick occurs I have to type NO or some such while I look for the proper button. I am a lousy typist but still a real misclick is so infrequent that it seems to me that those players who find themselves asking for an undo every few boards might want to do a little soul searching. The fact that I accept the request should not be taken as a statement that I really believe them.

[Free]

Basically I don't really see the point of allowing undos. Only in a friendly game where I know my opps and know they wouldn't abuse the function I'd allow one.

 

People use misclick as a reason to allow the undo, but like many others I get the feeling that this argument is abused. There are way too much undo requests while I never have a misclick myself. Some people blame their mousepad for their many misclicks. Well, they should just buy a mouse imo, it's not like it's a huge investment...

[blackshoe]

It boggles my mind that people get upset when their opponents won't let them cheat. :ph34r:

[the_dude]

I always allow undos. I have no interest in "beating" an opponent because he misclicked. Heck we all make misclicks.

 

And if he does it again (or it's an obvious attempt to recover from an error) I find new opponents at the completion of the hand.

[jillybean]

I always allow undos. I have no interest in "beating" an opponent because he misclicked. Heck we all make misclicks.

 

And if he does it again (or it's an obvious attempt to recover from an error) I find new opponents at the completion of the hand.

I don't make misclicks. I play too fast, multitask or simply forget what has been played and I don't ask for undo's.

[diana_eva]

It's OK to refuse an undo that looks like a mis-think, or playing too fast. However there are lots of old people playing who do have tremors and other old age diseases and misclick a lot.

[wickedbid1]

I accept most requests, I seldom ask for one myself. Really, unless you have some nerve or muscular disorder, how often do you really misclick?

 

The most extreme request was from a guy who led small from the dummy to his ace. I ruffed the ace and he asked for an undo. That one I rejected. As I recall, he left in a huff.

 

I ask so seldom that when the occasional real misclick occurs I have to type NO or some such while I look for the proper button. I am a lousy typist but still a real misclick is so infrequent that it seems to me that those players who find themselves asking for an undo every few boards might want to do a little soul searching. The fact that I accept the request should not be taken as a statement that I really believe them.

 

The example above is drawn from declarer play. I believe, in f2f play the declarer is entitled to replace any played card as long as the next hand has not followed to the trick -- declarer has no penalty cards, as no unauthorized information can be conveyed. So in online play I automatically grant declarer's play undos when I am the next hand, for the reason that I think it's a good idea to make our online play mirror f2f play wherever possible. I also tend to accept declarer play undos from the other side, as long as they r asked for quickly.

 

There seems to be a lot of style differences regarding whether to accept undos or not. I try to figure out what the culture of the table is and fit in with that.

 

I misclick a lot, especially during bidding, (I can't catch a baseball either) but I don't ask for undos until I am sure it is part of the opps culture at the table. I never ask for undos if I can't find the undo button before others have taken an action, I have a pet peeve about that one.

 

I never ask for undos because I have forgotten the system, or come up with a better play a split second after I make my actual play. That is super unethical, although I agree it happens online. Sometimes, lower level players do this without realizing, I believe, that just changing their mind is not a respected criterion for an undo ask.

 

If I am fairly sure an advanced or "expert" opp is asking for undos for shadey reasons, or making a claim on a two way finesse, etc. the simple remedy is to put them on my enemies list and move on. Life is too short.

[Free]

I believe, in f2f play the declarer is entitled to replace any played card as long as the next hand has not followed to the trick

No he's not! Even Bermuda Bowls have been decided over pointing to a card! (USA vs Italy 2003)

[shintaro]

:blink:

 

I would never ever consider asking for an undo If I make a misclick I live with it

 

What I dont do and think should never be allowed is Telling people that you HAVE Mis-Bid or Misplayed so that 'Illegal' inferences can been drawn

 

Just Pay more attention to the Game B-)

[peachy]

Good question. The table host has the right to decide No Undos, or allow undos for anything, or only in bidding, or whatever. If you do not like the table host's prefences, then play elsewhere. But if undos are allowed at the table, then don't refuse :)

[Zelandakh]

Sorry peachy but this is wrong. Just because the host says that undos are allowed at the table does not mean that I have to accept an undo where they are obviously double-shotting, or for an opening lead, etc. The host can say undos are allowed but cannot say that all undos must be accepted.

[shintaro]

Sorry peachy but this is wrong. Just because the host says that undos are allowed at the table does not mean that I have to accept an undo where they are obviously double-shotting, or for an opening lead, etc. The host can say undos are allowed but cannot say that all undos must be accepted.

 

 

:rolleyes:

 

yup with you Z

 

B-)

[A2003]

On-line players should be informed about this feature.

Place the mouse arrow on the card to be played without clicking.

The card pop-up slight ahead of the layout, ensure the card you want to play and then take 0.5 to 1 sec delay and click to play the card.

This is a double move. This minimizes misclicks if practiced enough.

 

Video presentation in BBO news may be helpful.

[blackshoe]

The host, as I understand it, can say whatever he likes. "My rules, or I take my ball and bat and go home". Doesn't mean you have to play in his game. Of course, there's no way to enforce "must accept all undos" as the software is written. Again, as I understand it; I'm no expert in the mechanics of online play.

[kenberg]

Playing f2f yesterday I did something that was technically wrong. Rho opened 1NT, I passed, Lho bid 1S. I said no, he looked in shock at the 1S card on the table, and I said "If you want to bid 2S just go ahead, otherwise we need the director because I don't know all the rules". He bid 2S, alerted as a trf to clubs. Indeed this was the intent of the 1S bidder and the final contract was 3C. Of course I was in the wrong. Players are not supposed to make rulings and in this case I think the director would have allowed my partner to accept the bid. So the bidding maybe could have gone 1NT-1S-1NT-2S-3C. Big deal, but mea culpa.

 

Anyway, the relevance here is that I don't particularly want to punish mechanical errors but I do think it is reasonable to expect players not to lean too much on my indulgence. By using the technique suggested by A2003, or some variant of their own choosing, most players could manage. I acknowledge the existence of nerve and muscular disorders but the vast majority of my errors are errors of thought and I believe this is true for almost everyone.

 

Btw, we had a 65% game. If we held the 1S bidder's feet to the fire, say we might have insisted that their convention card did not show that 1NT-1S-1NT-2S was a transfer, perhaps we could have made 66%. I prefer doing it my way.

[ArtK78]

Playing f2f yesterday I did something that was technically wrong. Rho opened 1NT, I passed, Lho bid 1S. I said no, he looked in shock at the 1S card on the table, and I said "If you want to bid 2S just go ahead, otherwise we need the director because I don't know all the rules". He bid 2S, alerted as a trf to clubs. Indeed this was the intent of the 1S bidder and the final contract was 3C. Of course I was in the wrong. Players are not supposed to make rulings and in this case I think the director would have allowed my partner to accept the bid. So the bidding maybe could have gone 1NT-1S-1NT-2S-3C. Big deal, but mea culpa.

 

Anyway, the relevance here is that I don't particularly want to punish mechanical errors but I do think it is reasonable to expect players not to lean too much on my indulgence. By using the technique suggested by A2003, or some variant of their own choosing, most players could manage. I acknowledge the existence of nerve and muscular disorders but the vast majority of my errors are errors of thought and I believe this is true for almost everyone.

 

Btw, we had a 65% game. If we held the 1S bidder's feet to the fire, say we might have insisted that their convention card did not show that 1NT-1S-1NT-2S was a transfer, perhaps we could have made 66%. I prefer doing it my way.

 

Sorry if this is a hijack, and I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that if the correction of an insufficient bid by making it sufficient results in a conventional call, then the usual rule permitting the bidder to make his bid sufficient without penalty does not apply. Having said that, if it is obvious that the intent of the bidder was to make the conventional call, perhaps it should be allowed. I just do not know if the laws allow that correction without penalty.

 

If the error was truly a mechanical error, then a correction of the mechanical error should always be allowed without penalty.

[semeai]

Sorry if this is a hijack, and I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that if the correction of an insufficient bid by making it sufficient results in a conventional call, then the usual rule permitting the bidder to make his bid sufficient without penalty does not apply. Having said that, if it is obvious that the intent of the bidder was to make the conventional call, perhaps it should be allowed. I just do not know if the laws allow that correction without penalty.

 

If the error was truly a mechanical error, then a correction of the mechanical error should always be allowed without penalty.

 

Law 27B1a says that it's fine if both bids are incontrovertibly natural. If not, then 27B1b says it's fine if the corrected bid has the same meaning as or a more precise meaning than the insufficient bid.

 

What the "meaning of an insufficient bid" like 1♠ here is was the subject of a recent lengthy discussion in the laws forum. I think one opinion was that it is whatever the player who bid it intended, as far as the director can determine. With this interpretation, if the director thought the player intended to transfer to clubs, the correction to 2♠ would be fine.

 

Beware that I'm not a laws expert.