Misclicks, UI

[jillybean]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s5hajt96543d83ca9&w=sjt64hq72dq95cqj6&e=saq973hdak72ck754&s=sk82hk8djt64ct832]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♠    Pass  2♠

 Pass  3♥    Pass  3♠

 Pass  4♥    Dbl   Pass

 Pass  Pass  

 

HI,

 

I had this call in my tournament, (board had finished) first of all the opps complained that psyches were not legal in tournaments, North then apologized to the table for the ‘misclick’.

The opps went on to say a misclick should have been alerted. I know why a misclick should not be alerted, I am not completely clear on why a misclick should not be announced at the table.

In an ‘undo allowed’ tournament a misclick is announced via the undo request and covered by laws 25 and 16C.

 

So, if we disallow undo’s, an announcement is UI like any other UI ?

 

Is it legal to disallow undo's, or simply as the SO you can do what you please?

 

 

tyia

jb

[McBruce]

From the auction alone we have the words DOUBLE SHOT screaming at any experienced TD in neon lights. The player with a void in trumps makes a clear penalty double (it cannot be takeout since he failed to double hearts earlier), and then calls for the Director when the contract makes.

 

"first of all the opps complained that psyches were not legal in tournaments..."

 

Strike one to the complainers then. Note that they believe not just that psyches are illegal in this tournament, but that psyches are illegal in all tournaments! This is a truly disturbing trend.

 

"...North then apologized to the table for the ‘misclick’..."

 

Fair enough.

 

"The opps went on to say a misclick should have been alerted."

 

More plaintiffs who don't know the rules! If you require an alert for a misclick, what's next? Alerting when you realize you should have made a different call?

 

Folks, we need to realize that when the TD is called (assuming the TD is competant), it is not a game of "throw enough mud and see if enough of it sticks." People who make up the rules as they blow the whistle are never going to get the benefit of any doubt from a good TD. If I am called to the table here, I look for evidence that N-S have a prior knowledge about this type of auction. The bull about the psyches and the alertable misclicks are to me simply irritants that ensure E-W are assumed to be twits instead of fair-minded bridge players.

 

"I know why a misclick should not be alerted, I am not completely clear on why a misclick should not be announced at the table."

 

Because it is UI to partner. In online bridge you might send a private message to the opponents saying that you had misclicked. But it is not obligatory to do so. I see no evidence in the auction that South has any special knowledge that needs to be divulged to the opponents. Had East passed South would be under some serious pressure, but when East made his idiotic double South was off the hook.

 

Result stands, E-W are very close to a procedural penalty and at the very least should be sternly warned that their complaint is completely without merit.

[pigpenz]

IMO East let North off the hook by doubling, giving south the chance to pass the deciscion back to north. Maybe North didnt mean to misclick but if East hadnt doubled South would have bid 4♠ and then East could have doubled.

 

I would rule....Score stands....and if

East continues a procedural penalty.

[candybar]

Keep in mind that you are only required to alert or explain your AGREEMENTS. A misclicked bid (in no-undo situations) must be treated as a normal bid.

 

The fact that it was a mistaken bid (or a psyche, or an out-of-system bid) need not be revealed to the opponents, and certainly should not be revealed to your partner.

 

If an opponent asks, you are free to privately tell him it was a misclick, but you if you choose not to and they ask for explanation, you should explain your agreements on the bid you actually made, even though it is not what you hold in your hand.

 

The one time I did this, I sent a private message to the TD immediately, saying that I had misclicked, and had explained my actual bid to the opponents, but the opponents were likely to complain when they found out. Sure enough, they did, and the TD rightly told them no adjustment.

[jillybean]

In online bridge you might send a private message to the opponents saying that you had misclicked. 

Heh, how can this be correct ?

Surely this the same as alerting a bid and explaining what you have in your hand as opposed to your partnership agreement - the opps now know more than your partner! :)

 

I was intrested in knowing the laws behind this decision and how they apply.

 

wbf 16A:

Extraneous Information from Partner

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may

suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a

question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis,

tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose

from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have

been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

 

Maybe this law does apply here, is there another law which says 'you can not announce to the table what you have in your hand' ? :)

 

My 2nd question is still unanswered - is banning undos (Law25) legal or just an online thing?

 

jb

[candybar]

In online bridge you might send a private message to the opponents saying that you had misclicked.

Heh, how can this be correct ?

Surely this the same as alerting a bid and explaining what you have in your hand as opposed to your partnership agreement - the opps now know more than your partner! :)

You may, if you wish. There is no Law prohibiting giving extra information to the opponents, and if you do, they are free to use it. However, you are definitely not required to do so. I personally do not.

 

...is there another law which says 'you can not announce to the table what you have in your hand' ?

Yes.

 

Proprieties

LAW 73 COMMUNICATION

A. Proper Communication between Partners

1. How Effected

Communication between partners during the auction and play shall be effected only by means of the calls and plays themselves.

B. Inappropriate Communication Between Partners

1. Gratuitous Information

Partners shall not communicate through the manner in which calls or plays are made, through extraneous remarks or gestures, through questions asked or not asked of the opponents or through alerts and explanations given or not given to them.

 

 

I was intrested in knowing the laws behind this decision and how they apply.

 

wbf 16A:

Extraneous Information from Partner

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

This means that if a player does receive unauthorized information, he is

(1) Not allowed to use it, but moreover,

(2) Must choose a call or play that CANNOT have been suggested by the unauthorized information, if any such alternative exists. You are not allowed to choose an advantageous call/play, and then say, "but that's what I would have done anyway."

 

My 2nd question is still unanswered - is banning undos (Law25) legal or just an online thing?

It is an online thing. Normally, in the case of ANY irregularity, the director MUST be summoned, and s/he then determines if any undo of bidding or play is warranted.

 

In non-tournament online play, there is no director, so undos are reasonable, due to computer/mouse glitches, although in my opinion they are far overused for brain glitches.

 

In tournament online play, it is appropriate to have the director make such decisions, but unfortunately there is no undo available to the director alone, so tournaments have to be set up either with undos allowed by opponents or no undos allowed. Hopefully this will be corrected one of these days.

[candybar]

By the way, this brings up another pet peeve of mine ...

 

When undos are not allowed, people sometimes say "misclick" publicly at the table. This of course alerts their partner that their bid or play is not what they intended.

 

In such a case, unauthorized information has clearly been passed, and I believe that such players should be educated immediately about passing UI to their partner, and if damage can be demonstrated, adjustments made in accordance with UI rules.

[jillybean]

I was intrested in knowing the laws behind this decision and how they apply.

 

wbf 16A:

Extraneous Information from Partner

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may

suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a

question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis,

tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose

from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have

been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

oops that should have been..

16

Players are authorised to base their calls and plays on information from legal calls

and or plays, and from mannerisms of opponents. To base a call or play on other

extraneous information may be an infraction of law.

[candybar]

oops that should have been..

16

Players are authorised to base their calls and plays on information from legal calls

and or plays, and from mannerisms of opponents. To base a call or play on other

extraneous information may be an infraction of law.

Yes, this means that OPPONENTS are free to use such information. But it is always at their own risk.

 

If an opponent hesitates before playing, presumably thinking about something, you are allowed to notice that and use it. But if you make a play based on such mannerisms, you don't get to complain later that you were wrong.

 

If the opponents ask about some bid you made, you are allowed to construe whatever you want from that, but the questioner's partner is NOT.

 

This also has been the source of some related rules, such as you are not allowed to deliberately hesitate or do things to deceive the opponents. Hesitating longer than tempo when you have a singleton is, for example, improper.

[inquiry]

From the auction alone we have the words DOUBLE SHOT screaming at any experienced TD in neon lights. The player with a void in trumps makes a clear penalty double (it cannot be takeout since he failed to double hearts earlier), and then calls for the Director when the contract makes.

 

"The opps went on to say a misclick should have been alerted."

Lets deal with the aspect of penatly double with a void. East is looking at five spades to the AQ, his partner is clearly void in Spades or at the most one spade. He also has AK of diamonds, king of clubs and a heart void. The heart void is important here because it means hearts are splitting badly for declarer. It is not unreasonable to think partner has five hearts.

 

So i don't think it is at all fair to rag on the doubler with a void for doubling. Anyone would double this auction.

 

Next the arguements used here are somewhat strange. Psyches are not outlawed in all tourneys, but Jilly didn't clarify if psyches where outlawed here. From the title, it could be that north did psych and is know implying rather than a psyche he/she misclicked. I think outlawing psyches are agaisnt the laws of bridge, so how to rule in this situation is a guess. But i guess I would rule (if they were outlawed) that 1♠ was indeed a psyche and do what ever it is i do in that case.

 

Next, if psyches are legal here (as they should be), there is a question of south's final pass. 3♥ would be game try, partner rejects, 4♥ is now a slam try. So passing 4♥ might be second round control of hearts, or soemthing. But the question is why choose hearts with longer spades. This is a question that makes it looks like south "fielded" the psyche. This might require furhter questioning of the ns pair experience and history.

 

But it is true that north should not alert 1♠ as misclick or psyche. That is wrong in a tourney (unless it allows undo's).

[jillybean]

Psyches were allowed.

[McBruce]

"I don't think it is at all fair to rag on the doubler with a void for doubling. Anyone would double this auction."

 

Not me. I have a partner who can double if he wants to.

 

When I suspect the wheels have come off in an auction, I don't double based on what partner should have, because what I expect partner to have is based on what the opponents are claiming to have, and if their wheels are off, my prediction of what partner should have is also going to be off. If they're in the wrong suit and partner really has the trump stack but not enough to double, we're going to get a good score by playing 4♥ undoubled down a few. Doubling allows them to escape to 4♠ which might not go for as much or might even make if partner has nothing and they have magic shape.

 

"Next, if psyches are legal here (as they should be), there is a question of south's final pass. 3♥ would be game try, partner rejects, 4♥ is now a slam try. So passing 4♥ might be second round control of hearts, or soemthing. But the question is why choose hearts with longer spades. This is a question that makes it looks like south "fielded" the psyche. This might require furhter questioning of the ns pair experience and history."

 

3♥ looks like a natural call to me based on South's response of only 3♠. If 3♥ was a help suit or long suit game try, South has an AWFULLY good eight count for his original raise, and I expect most would bid 4♠ like a shot. I would ask, but would expect the response that 3♥ was natural, a second suit. And when North bids 4♥, South can envision a hand with 6-5 or maybe bad5-good5. With 97654/AQJ73/K7/A or 97654/AQJT73/void/A6 North might open 1♠ to avoid losing a possible spade fit. If that is a possibility, wouldn't you pass as South after the double and let partner decide what to do?