Telling your partner declarer's card

[gwnn]

In 3NT, I win trick 2 with the ♦A in my hand and start trick 3 with a small diamond from my hand.

 

LHO says "Huh?" (implying that I am playing from the wrong side)

RHO says "No it's fine. Remember, he won trick 2 with the ace of diamonds."

 

What would happen if I called the TD here? Some sort of warning not to do this again and telling my LHO (assuming they actually didn't pay attention) that they need to plan their defence using LAs not suggested by the UI that I had the ace?

 

That seems very impractical, but do these cases come up?

 

PS in the club I wouldn't make a fuss out of it but this was in a tournament.

PPS what would happen without any communication from RHO? LHO could always pretend that I am playing from the wrong side if they want to see my card from the previous trick, I guess?

 

What actually happened was I said "you're not supposed to tell your partner what I played" and RHO said "oh but I was just trying to help him." I thought to myself, yea, that's kind of the point.

[Vampyr]

In 3NT, I win trick 2 with the ♦A in my hand and start trick 3 with a small diamond from my hand.

 

LHO says "Huh?" (implying that I am playing from the wrong side)

RHO says "No it's fine. Remember, he won trick 2 with the ace of diamonds."

 

What would happen if I called the TD here? Some sort of warning not to do this again and telling my LHO (assuming they actually didn't pay attention) that they need to plan their defence using LAs not suggested by the UI that I had the ace?

 

That seems very impractical, but do these cases come up?

 

PS in the club I wouldn't make a fuss out of it but this was in a tournament.

PPS what would happen without any communication from RHO? LHO could always pretend that I am playing from the wrong side if they want to see my card from the previous trick, I guess?

 

They are not entitled to see your card or to be informed as to what it was. Probably the director would do something like the above. Perhaps it seems a little impractical, but it is a very rare occurrence.

[gwnn]

I didn't mean to say that they are entitled to see my card, but in practice, it would be hard to resolve the dispute without showing them my card. I suppose I could call the TD and show it only to the TD?

[Vampyr]

I didn't mean to say that they are entitled to see my card, but in practice, it would be hard to resolve the dispute without showing them my card. I suppose I could call the TD and show it only to the TD?

 

Yes. It is normal for director to look at all four cards of a trick in cases like this (usually it is when someone ruffs and the wrong person leads to the next trick) without letting anyone else see them.

[gwnn]

Huh, I've never seen that happen before. Usually people flip their cards even before the director arrives. But I'm not doubting you, just wishing I had the same experience :)

[gwnn]

It's just generally annoying that I'd never dream of telling my partner anything about declarer's cards and people who are less scrupulous get a practical advantage. Although it's like that with almost any rule, I guess.

[barmar]

Since when are cards that are legally played and not withdrawn UI to anyone?

[pran]

Since when are cards that are legally played and not withdrawn UI to anyone?

A. Current Trick

So long as his side has not led or played to the next trick, declarer or either defender may, until he has turned his own card face down on the table, require that all cards just played to the trick be faced.

B. Own Last Card

Until his side has led or played to the next trick, declarer or either defender may inspect, but not expose, his own last card played.

C. Quitted Tricks

Thereafter, until play ceases, the cards of quitted tricks may not be inspected (except at the Director’s specific instruction; for example, if necessary to verify a claim of a revoke).

D. After the Conclusion of Play

{.....}

[gwnn]

Since when are cards that are legally played and not withdrawn UI to anyone?

Since when can defenders refresh each other's memory during the play?

[mycroft]

"Yes, declarer is in his hand." Anything else is extraneous, and we should try to clamp down on it.

 

The chance of it happening at all is ... not high.

 

"He trumped it, didn't you see that?" is another of my favourites.

[blackshoe]

IME, at the clubs around here, it happens at least three or four times a day at my table. Somebody questions who's on lead, and the leader exposes his quitted card. Or the questioner's partner tells the questioner "he trumped it" or "he overtrumped" or "he won it with the ace" or whatever.

 

This is blatant passing of UI. While these folks are probably not even thinking about how they might use it, extraneous knowledge is insidious. It may affect their play even if they're not thinking about it.

 

I don't call the director, because he'll just ask why I'm bothering him. But I should, and he should tell these folks to cut it out. With a PP if necessary.

[Vampyr]

IME, at the clubs around here, it happens at least three or four times a day at my table. Somebody questions who's on lead, and the leader exposes his quitted card. Or the questioner's partner tells the questioner "he trumped it" or "he overtrumped" or "he won it with the ace" or whatever.

 

This is blatant passing of UI. While these folks are probably not even thinking about how they might use it, extraneous knowledge is insidious. It may affect their play even if they're not thinking about it.

 

I don't call the director, because he'll just ask why I'm bothering him. But I should, and he should tell these folks to cut it out. With a PP if necessary.

 

If this practice is common in the ACBL it will be legal in the next edition of the laws.

[pran]

IME, at the clubs around here, it happens at least three or four times a day at my table. Somebody questions who's on lead, and the leader exposes his quitted card. Or the questioner's partner tells the questioner "he trumped it" or "he overtrumped" or "he won it with the ace" or whatever.

 

This is blatant passing of UI. While these folks are probably not even thinking about how they might use it, extraneous knowledge is insidious. It may affect their play even if they're not thinking about it.

 

I don't call the director, because he'll just ask why I'm bothering him. But I should, and he should tell these folks to cut it out. With a PP if necessary.

So long as neither defender has played to a trick either of them may ask whether declarer led from the wrong hand and even request all four cards from the last (previous) trick to be exposed (Law 66).

 

This is simple procedure with no need for the Director.

[gwnn]

So long as neither defender has played to a trick either of them may ask whether declarer led from the wrong hand and even request all four cards from the last (previous) trick to be exposed (Law 66).

 

This is simple procedure with no need for the Director.

Really?

Until his side has led or played to the next trick, declarer or either defender may inspect, but not expose, his own last card played.

[pran]

Really?

Sorry, correct. I confused 66A and 66B

(But he is still permitted to ask if a lead has been attempted from the wrong hand and have that question resolved.)

[pescetom]

If this practice is common in the ACBL it will be legal in the next edition of the laws.

 

Common here too unfortunately, but usually the culprits are just poor players who assume everyone else is too.