Questions on disclosure of opps bidding methods

[gordontd]

My posts were in response to one that began "In the EBU..."

 

Maybe the thread should be split.

[GreenMan]

The big problem with the ACBL card is all the printing on it. It is a very small CC to begin with, and all of the space is given over to suggested methods and check-boxes.

 

Indeed; many years ago I spent a year in France and found their standard CC quite easy to read by comparison; the wasted space on the ACBL card is a crime. In serious partnerships I make my own from scratch, following the general layout but without all the freakin' boxes.

[blackshoe]

But if rbfoster only wants to know the opponents'defense to his strong 1♣ and the meaning of advancer's double after 1x-1/2y-1/2z-Dbl (or 1x-Dbl-1y-Dbl) that doesn't take much time, does it?

Do we want a regulation that says "you can ask at most N questions?" How do we decide what N should be, given that the answers to some questions may be quite simple (and therefore short) and to others may be quite complex (and therefore long)? Do we give them a countdown clock, started when they begin to ask questions, and specify that when the clock dings, time's up, questions and answers cease, even if someone's in the middle of a sentence?

 

Re: splitting the thread. I can do that, but there are a couple of posts that it seems to me are equally applicable to both jurisdictions (and were made in response to posts about the EBU). I can't copy them, I either move them or don't. Where should I put them?

 

Keep in mind that thread drift is inevitable. It will happen even if we say "thread drift is not allowed".