Behaviour issues in Leeds

[Bbradley62]

The extract from OB 3 B 9 that I find worrying is "...if a 3♣ overcall is Ghestem, showing a hand with two specified suits, and if an opponent merely says “Weak or strong?” it is not unreasonable for a player to answer “Weak”, since this is true (and since more complete answers have been known to elicit comments such as “I did not ask that.”)".

I agree that this explanation is horrendous.

[mrdct]

Indeed, if my partner opened 2♦ (bad weak two in either major) and I was asked the question "weak or strong?" apparently in the EBU I would get away with simply responding "weak" as it's apparently "not unreasonable" to give such a reponse in that jurisdiction as it's "true".

 

In the Orange Book example of a Ghestem 3♣, if I asked if it was "weak or strong" and was told it was "weak" without any additional details about what suit or suits it shows, I would proceed on the basis that the hand was weak with a ♣ suit and be pretty upset when the hand turns up with a ♠/♦ two-suiter.

[lamford]

In the Orange Book example of a Ghestem 3♣, if I asked if it was "weak or strong" and was told it was "weak" without any additional details about what suit or suits it shows, I would proceed on the basis that the hand was weak with a ♣ suit and be pretty upset when the hand turns up with a ♠/♦ two-suiter.

I would regard the question as being to blame, not the answer, and I would hope you would continue to be upset if you sought redress from the TD. "Did you alert that?" "Yes". "Why did you alert that?" "Because it was not natural". "Does it show clubs?" "No". Etc. I think the best question is something like "What does the auction mean?" rather than inane questions about particular bids. My partner always says "Tell me what's going on" or very similar words.

 

I agree with FrancesHinden that "when asked a clear yes/no question assume that the questioner wants a yes/no answer". I might add "Ask a silly question and do not be surprised if you get a silly answer."

[Bbradley62]

Of course, the Orange Book has no mention of an alert in this auction, so maybe this is simply a poorly-constructed example.

[lamford]

Of course, the Orange Book has no mention of an alert in this auction, so maybe this is simply a poorly-constructed example.

Is that so? Certainly 3C, Ghestem, requires an alert, although it frequently does not get one! Or was the question about 3C which was not Ghestem? One issue is that some people mistakenly alert weak jump overcalls as well.

[Bbradley62]

According to the conversation we were given, South answered two simple and straight-forward yes/no questions with "no".

 

 

I'm not sure where the idea comes that EBU advice is illegal. The sentence quoted is one particularly warning about asking very specific questions. Most people, when asked a clear yes/no question assume that the questioner wants a yes/no answer.

 

 

I agree with FrancesHinden that "when asked a clear yes/no question assume that the questioner wants a yes/no answer". I might add "Ask a silly question and do not be surprised if you get a silly answer."

 

Yes, but when it's clear your answer is likely to be seen as misleading, you might want to avoid that situation. In the OP, the "no" answers are not at all misleading (assuming that the correct answer wasn't "yes").

[bluejak]

I suspect it's more accurate to say that most people, asked a yes/no question, don't think about anything other than answering yes or no. In particular, I doubt most people think much at all about what the questioner wants.

Maybe less so in bridge system questions, but one of my pet hates is the total inability of people when asked a Yes/No question to answer simply. This started with my mother who could not answer such a question in fewer than four sentences.

 

Recent experiences:

 

Q: "Did the player who revoked win the trick?"

A: "He had a spade left but played a club."

 

Q: "Are these the boards to go downstairs to the next table?"

A: "No."

Q: [looking puzzled] "You mean that these are not the boards to go downstairs?"

 

Q: "Do you play 5-card majors?"

A: "We open the better minor."

 

Q: "Is there a Debenham's in Chester City centre?"

A: "There's one in Mold."

 

Q: "When you say you play nine to twelve do you mean you open 1NT on nine?"

A: "Yes."

Q: "Do you really mean nine points?"

 

Q: "Does this train go to London?"

A: "If you want the London train try platform six.”

 

Q: "Is there a quicker way home than along the A55?"

A: "You could go along the motorway and take the fourth exit but it will be a lot longer."

 

Q: "Do you lead the Ace from ace-king?"

A: "We play fourth highest."

 

Half the world cannot answer "Yes" or "No", the other half cannot understand when someone does answer "Yes" or "No", and the third half suffers.

[mrdct]

Half the world cannot answer "Yes" or "No", the other half cannot understand when someone does answer "Yes" or "No", and the third half suffers.

Evidently, which is why yes/no questions and yes/no answers have little or no place at the bridge table as they are fundamentally in conflict with priciples of full disclosure as recognised by several major RAs.

 

Going back to the OP, the fact that East asked the third question should've made it perfectly clear that East did not understand the explanation given of the bid being queried so it is incumbant upon South to provide a proper explanation that East will understand. If that means he needs to speak slowly in words of two syllables or less to get his message across, so be it, but making a smart-arse remark doesn't do anything in helping East understand the meaning of the bid in question.

 

Any chance of posting the hand?

[Finch]

Maybe less so in bridge system questions, but one of my pet hates is the total inability of people when asked a Yes/No question to answer simply. This started with my mother who could not answer such a question in fewer than four sentences.

 

Recent experiences:

 

Q: "Is there a quicker way home than along the A55?"

A: "You could go along the motorway and take the fourth exit but it will be a lot longer."

 

 

I fully agree with your original point, but I think you are being unfair to responder on this one. I'm hopeless at route planning (that's Jeffrey's job) but the answer seems quite sensible to me if you interpret 'longer' in the sense of distance rather than time. To drive from my house to Dartford it is both a lot longer and faster to go round the M25 rather than through the centre of London.

[Vampyr]

Of course, the Orange Book has no mention of an alert in this auction, so maybe this is simply a poorly-constructed example.

 

Poorly constructed? It is taking the piss.

[Bbradley62]

Poorly constructed? It is taking the piss.

Can you let the New Jersey girl explain that comment?

[mrdct]

Taking the piss

[Bbradley62]

So, the Orange Book deliberately goes overboard with this example to make the point that simply answering the question you are asked is adequate?

[Vampyr]

So, the Orange Book deliberately goes overboard with this example to make the point that simply answering the question you are asked is adequate?

 

No, I meant that the comparison of the Ghestem/weak? question with the OP was just being silly, because:

 

Yes, but when it's clear your answer is likely to be seen as misleading, you might want to avoid that situation. In the OP, the "no" answers are not at all misleading (assuming that the correct answer wasn't "yes").

 

Or does someone want to suggest that the Orange Book and/or the Laws stipulate that a full and thorough explanation of the auction be repeated, even when this explanation does not indicate (due to negative inferences in the system, etc) whether the player can hold four spades? Must the questioner spend until the end of the session reading the opponents' system notes to determine whether the player in question might hold four spades? Can he not ask and expect an answer?

[Bbradley62]

Must the questioner spend until the end of the session reading the opponents' system notes to determine whether the player in question might hold four spades? Can he not ask and expect an answer?

Of course he can ask and expect an answer. His first two questions gave him the answer. The third question asked whether opponent wanted to contradict himself, and therefore drew the smartass response.

[Vampyr]

Of course he can ask and expect an answer. His first two questions gave him the answer. The third question asked whether opponent wanted to contradict himself, and therefore drew the smartass response.

 

Yes, this is all fine with me.

[mrdct]

Of course he can ask and expect an answer. His first two questions gave him the answer. The third question asked whether opponent wanted to contradict himself, and therefore drew the smartass response.

His first two questions quite obviously did not give rise to a full disclosure explanation of the call in question which is presumebly why he saw fit to ask the third question. Perhaps there was something contradictory in some of the earlier statements by South which led to East's confusion as alluded to earlier:

 

I have spoken to a player who was at the table, and understand that the player designated "South" in the OP had made several such remarks that were perceived as aggressive by East-West but humourous by North. The comment in the OP just happened to be the last one made before the TD was called. East was upset by South and by the TD's handling of the situation; it was after this that he walked out, but he was persuaded to return, at least partly by West.

 

This is not intended to be a full account of events.

and

 

Well, I was west. I realise that people might want the full story..........which I'm not going to give, as this may not be the end of the matter. What I will clarify is that a) my partner never walked.............he stood to walk but was persuaded to remain and finish the match and b) the account you have been given is very incomplete, and the snippet you have been given is a distortion at best, and quite inaccurate.

[Trinidad]

Of course he can ask and expect an answer. His first two questions gave him the answer. The third question asked whether opponent wanted to contradict himself, and therefore drew the smartass response.

Even if it were as simple as that (which it isn't), I hope we can agree that the smartass response has no place in bridge.

 

(It's all fine to have a humorous, not too serious, attitude at the table, but not when it's at the expense of another player.)

 

Rik