Another "picking up bidding cards as a pass" issue

[BudH]

Only dealer's side vulnerable, matchpoints, ACBL club game

 

1♣-Pass-1♠-Pass

3NT-4♥-Pass-Pass

?

 

Responder did not see the surprising 4♥ bid until just after she passed. For the purposes of my forthcoming question, assume she stopped herself from saying anything and did NOT give opener any unauthorized information (at this point in the auction).

 

Then opener's RHO passed followed by opener starting to remove her bidding cards from the table. Just as opener had picked up all of her bidding cards, responder said something like "you still have a bid", "you still have a call", or "the auction is not over", or something similar. The opponents object, asserting opener has made the final pass of the auction when she removed her bidding cards from the table. What is your ruling?

 

In my opinion, I would take opener away from the table and ask if (1) she was passing by removing her bidding cards or (2) thought the action was over (that RHO's pass was the final pass of the auction). If (2), which I think is likely, then the auction continues with opener's next call, plus potential UI from responder's comment about the auction not being over yet.

 

[Yes, this is yet another example of why (a) you should use your pass card when making the final pass, and (2) leaving bidding cards on the table until the opening lead is faced has some clear advantages.]

[mink]

I cannot see why it is likely that the opener thought that the auction was over. By removing the bidding cards she made clear that she wanted to pass. However, the pass did not really happen, and therefore she can make another call. However, I would inform the opener that a contract other than 4♥ will very likely be subject to an adjustment if the result is favourable for the offending side compared with the probable result of 4♥.

[pran]

Does the ACBL regulation specify STOP with competitive calls at the three level or higher?

If not, this is another example where such use of STOP should be compulsory.

 

If STOP was used with the 4♥ bid then opener has no excuse, he ended the auction with an implied pass.

 

If STOP was not used while it is required in this situation I would rule that opener may bid, or double the 4♥ bid without any risk of a score adjustment.

 

If STOP is not required I would rule that responder used her right under Law 9A3: However any player, including dummy, may attempt to prevent another players committing an irregularity (Closing the auction by picking up bid cards instead of first displaying a PASS card is clearly an irregularity!)

[blackshoe]

ACBL regulations do not say anything about using the stop card for calls at the three level or higher, and do not say anything at all about when to pick up the bidding cards or how to interpret that action.

 

It seems to me that if a player uses a legal right, that usage may convey UI (Law 16A1{c}). I don't think that should be the law, but it is.

[johnu]

Does the ACBL regulation specify STOP with competitive calls at the three level or higher?

 

What jurisdictions require a stop card for the 4♥ bid?

[nige1]

The law should stipulate that bidding-cards remain on the table, until after the opening-lead is faced. And the law that the auction ends with 3 pass-cards should be enforced. For bidding-boxes, as for most other aspects of Bridge, there's no logic or sense in different regulators insisting on different rules.

[Bbradley62]

Then opener's RHO passed followed by opener starting to remove her bidding cards from the table. Just as opener had picked up all of her bidding cards, responder said something like "you still have a bid", "you still have a call", or "the auction is not over", or something similar. The opponents object, asserting opener has made the final pass of the auction when she removed her bidding cards from the table. What is your ruling?

I haven't been at a duplicate table in almost 20 years, but I agree with the opponents. If you disagree with the opponents, then Opener should be allowed to proceed with no restrictions or threats of potential adjustments.

[Vampyr]

Does the ACBL regulation specify STOP with competitive calls at the three level or higher?

If not, this is another example where such use of STOP should be compulsory.

 

 

What jurisdictions require a stop card for the 4♥ bid?

 

Some European ones. It is a very sensible regulation, and I wish we had it.

[barmar]

The law should stipulate that bidding-cards remain on the table, until after the opening-lead is faced.

The Laws don't even mention the existence of bidding cards. They're governed only by local regulations.

[barmar]

I'd like to know whether opener habitually picks up their bidding cards when making a final pass, or this is an unusual action for them. The latter would indicate that he didn't notice the 4♥ bid.

 

But I'm not sure it really matters, as I think responder's comment is UI and effectively negates any possibility of correcting the action.

[axman]

I haven't been at a duplicate table in almost 20 years, but I agree with the opponents. If you disagree with the opponents, then Opener should be allowed to proceed with no restrictions or threats of potential adjustments.

 

Such an arrangement appears to be a form of Weasel.

[billw55]

Of course picking up the bidding cards means pass. Contract is 4♥ undoubled, play please. This is an entirely fair consequence either for use of an incorrect procedure, or for failing to pay attention, whichever occurred.

[pigpenz]

I had one the other day where in a Keycard auction with my partner, my partner signed off in 5♠

we had no agreement on bidding with a void so I was thinking when I looked at my RHO all off her bidding cards

were in the box and I said I was waiting for you to bid....she told me I was full of it, I called her a B and

off to a Zero Tolerance complaint we went.

[blackshoe]

If you read the ZT policy carefully, you will discover that your opponent's rudeness is no excuse for your own. In such a case, both of you rate a ZT penalty.

 

I would simply have asked RHO "you've passed?" And when she affirms that she has, I would make whatever call I think I should make.

[ggwhiz]

The opener didn't see the 4♥ bid and was only aware of it after her partner pointed it out. 4♥ float is what I would rule.

 

I've had a handful of auctions where the bidding cards were picked up prematurely and my favorite was against a really nasty opponent. I left my cards on the table and let him lead before I then pulled 3nt to 4 of a major creating a lead out of turn.

[pran]

The opener didn't see the 4♥ bid and was only aware of it after her partner pointed it out. 4♥ float is what I would rule.

 

I've had a handful of auctions where the bidding cards were picked up prematurely and my favorite was against a really nasty opponent. I left my cards on the table and let him lead before I then pulled 3nt to 4 of a major creating a lead out of turn.

No - you didn't.

 

What you did was to establish that he exposed a card during the auction. Law 24B applies (regardless of card rank).

[blackshoe]

Major penalty card, his partner must pass. If ggwhiz's partner passes, the miscreant can bid, double, or pass, but he still has a major penalty card, and his partner is still on lead, unless his side wins the contract, which sounds unlikely.

[pran]

Major penalty card, his partner must pass. If ggwhiz's partner passes, the miscreant can bid, double, or pass, but he still has a major penalty card, and his partner is still on lead, unless his side wins the contract, which sounds unlikely.

This isn't exactly correct!

 

When the Director determines that during the auction period because of a player’s own error one or more cards of that player’s hand were in position for the face to be seen by his partner, the Director shall require that every such card be left face up on the table until the auction period ends. Information from cards thus exposed is authorized for the non-offending side but unauthorized for the offending side. If the offender becomes declarer or dummy the cards are picked up and returned to the hand. If the offender becomes a defender every such card becomes a penalty card (see Law 50), then:

[...]

B. Single Card of Honour Rank or Card Prematurely Led

 

If it is a single card of honour rank or is any card prematurely led offender’s partner must pass when next it is his turn to call (see Law 23 when a pass damages the non-offending side).

so:

1: The card doesn't becomes a (major) penalty card before the auction period ends and then only if the offender becomes a defender.

2: The offender's partner must pass at his next turn to call but is not subject to any further such restriction if he gets another chance to call later in the auction.

[blackshoe]

This isn't exactly correct!

…

so:

1: The card doesn't becomes a (major) penalty card before the auction period ends and then only if the offender becomes a defender.

2: The offender's partner must pass at his next turn to call but is not subject to any further such restriction if he gets another chance to call later in the auction.

Picky, picky.

 

1. Do you really think I don't know that?

2. If I had thought offender's partner had further restrictions after his enforced pass at his next call, I'd have said so.

[pran]

Picky, picky.

 

1. Do you really think I don't know that?

2. If I had thought offender's partner had further restrictions after his enforced pass at his next call, I'd have said so.

No, frankly I was very surprised over what you wrote.

(An interesting fact is that it is even possible for the offender to become Dummy!)

 

But there are so many reading this forum who will easily be misinformed when we give inaccurate information so I believe we should take some care being precise?

[blackshoe]

Frankly, it didn't occur to me at the time that anyone reading this forum would not understand that what I wrote was a shorthand, rather than a full exposition of the laws and regulations in force.

 

Do you want me to establish a protocol for this forum that no one shall write any opinions on rulings without a full exposition of the laws supporting their logic?

[pran]

Frankly, it didn't occur to me at the time that anyone reading this forum would not understand that what I wrote was a shorthand, rather than a full exposition of the laws and regulations in force.

 

Do you want me to establish a protocol for this forum that no one shall write any opinions on rulings without a full exposition of the laws supporting their logic?

No

 

I misread your post and wanted to prevent others from doing the same

[blackshoe]

Fair enough.

[barmar]

Frankly, it didn't occur to me at the time that anyone reading this forum would not understand that what I wrote was a shorthand, rather than a full exposition of the laws and regulations in force.

Don't you regularly correct people who don't spell everything out fully? How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot? :)

[blackshoe]

How do you think it feels?