You may have some difficulty believing this, but it actually happened ACBL, but possible anywhere, I suppose
#1
Posted 2013-May-11, 05:22
East opened 2♣, West responded 2♠, and after three passes that is the final contract.
E-W are very nice new players, possibly at their first tournament, but have been seen at the club a few times in the entry-level lesson-games.
West explains that the review is slightly incorrect: actually, the auction went like this:
East displayed the Stop card and opened 2♣, West responded 2♠, and after three passes that is the final contract.
When you ask how this is different, West explains patiently that with the Stop card they play this as a preempt. Without the Stop card, it's strong and forcing. She is entirely serious, completely without guilt or fear, and East has six losers and seven clubs to the AKQJ. The only thing you have going for you is that these opponents are kind enough to let you handle it. Your move, TD. (Tread carefully.)
Please come back to the live game; I directed enough online during COVID for several lifetimes.
Bruce McIntyre,
#2
Posted 2013-May-11, 05:53
McBruce, on 2013-May-11, 05:22, said:
East opened 2♣, West responded 2♠, and after three passes that is the final contract.
E-W are very nice new players, possibly at their first tournament, but have been seen at the club a few times in the entry-level lesson-games.
West explains that the review is slightly incorrect: actually, the auction went like this:
East displayed the Stop card and opened 2♣, West responded 2♠, and after three passes that is the final contract.
When you ask how this is different, West explains patiently that with the Stop card they play this as a preempt. Without the Stop card, it's strong and forcing. She is entirely serious, completely without guilt or fear, and East has six losers and seven clubs to the AKQJ. The only thing you have going for you is that these opponents are kind enough to let you handle it. Your move, TD. (Tread carefully.)
In all sincerity, I'd congratulate E/W on their creativity and say that they might have a future as systems designers. However, I'd also explain (nicely) that the the laws of the game require that they only use their bids to communicate information about their hand type. They can not use the stop card to convey extra information.
I'd explain that there has been an infraction of the rules of the game and that there might need to be an adjustment. They should play the hand out and N/S should then let me know if they think that there has been any damage.
I'd also ask E/W to talk to me after the game so we can discuss some details about competitive bridge that might not have been covered during their class.
I would not assess a procedural penalty for beginners...
#3
Posted 2013-May-11, 05:54
Then I rule on this hand, which I treat as a failure to alert a weak 2C opening bid. N gets a do-over of the last pass, and NS are protected from damage resulting from the MI, as in a routine MI case.
#4
Posted 2013-May-11, 06:16
The Secretary General of the Norwegian Bridge Federation told me some years later that they had had to drop this STOP rule because players within some Norwegian regions had "invented" a new system where STOP 1NT showed 12-14 HCP and 1NT without STOP showed 15-17 HCP.
As he said: "It was completely impossible to make these guys understand that this was illegal use of STOP!"
#5
Posted 2013-May-11, 07:03
chrism, on 2013-May-11, 05:54, said:
Then I rule on this hand, which I treat as a failure to alert a weak 2C opening bid. N gets a do-over of the last pass, and NS are protected from damage resulting from the MI, as in a routine MI case.
I agree with your first paragraph (at least in the ACBL; in my jurisdiction the STOP card is mandatory) but I do not think it is equitable to treat this as simple MI. Doing so protects NOS from the MI, but it does not protect them from the fact that EW had the opportunity to open either a weak 2♣ or a strong 2♣, which they shouldn't have had. I would treat it as an illegal method as well as MI.
#6
Posted 2013-May-11, 07:20
McBruce, on 2013-May-11, 05:22, said:
#7
Posted 2013-May-11, 10:10
nige1, on 2013-May-11, 07:20, said:
In the ACBL:
A natural non-forcing 2♣ opening is alertable no matter what the range (including weak 2-bid and Precision 2♣)
NF suit responses to weak 2-bids are alertable
Strong artificial 2♣ opening is not alertable
#8
Posted 2013-May-11, 11:24
#9
Posted 2013-May-11, 11:48
bidding". It is quite common in the ACBL to interpret "should" in this sentence as "you ought to, but you don't have to," but (a) the laws define failure to do something one "should" do as an infraction of law, and (b) if you read the full regulation, it becomes clear that the intent is that the stop card (or skip bid warning) always be used.
The regulation, as listed in the "ACBL Codification" clearly states that it is illegal to use the stop card as this pair have done - they have an illegal agreement. Law 40B5 says that in such cases if the NOS are damaged (likely, in this case), "the score shall be adjusted".
I would not issue a PP in match points to this clearly novice pair, but I would make it clear that what they have done is illegal, and make sure they understand that if they do it again, sooner or later they will be penalized. "Sooner or later" because there's no guarantee that the next TD who runs into this will be aware it's not the first time they've done it.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#10
Posted 2013-May-11, 11:49
hrothgar, on 2013-May-11, 05:53, said:
I presume that you have left out a "not" here, and hope that it is not a disease caught from RMB1.
#11
Posted 2013-May-11, 12:13
blackshoe, on 2013-May-11, 11:48, said:
That, of course, is one of the problems with trying to teach "life novices" correct behavior. As long as they're perceived as players who don't know any better, they can get away with quite a bit.
I guess they'll eventually run out of directors who haven't seen them pull one of these stunts, and they'll get penalized because "I told you last time you can't do that."
#12
Posted 2013-May-11, 12:26
barmar, on 2013-May-11, 12:13, said:
I guess they'll eventually run out of directors who haven't seen them pull one of these stunts, and they'll get penalized because "I told you last time you can't do that."
I wish I could think of a better solution, but short of always issuing a PP, I can't, and I don't think that's really better, given that we want to be able to cut people a little slack for a first offense.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#13
Posted 2013-May-11, 12:48
lamford, on 2013-May-11, 11:49, said:
correct (and corrected)
#14
Posted 2013-May-11, 12:49
#15
Posted 2013-May-11, 15:41
pran, on 2013-May-11, 06:16, said:
Then it must be the explainer that is at fault. It reminded me of a pair in Birmingham who played revolving discards. The way they turned the card indicated whether they wanted the higher or lower suit. They understood this was not allowed when it was explained to them.
#16
Posted 2013-May-11, 16:34
chrism, on 2013-May-11, 10:10, said:
NF suit responses to weak 2-bids are alertable
Strong artificial 2♣ opening is not alertable
#17
Posted 2013-May-12, 01:01
Today I was concerned when 'Team Stop Card' did not play in the afternoon session, but they did arrive for the evening 0-750 game, and I had a very quick chat with them about the stop card and offered a more lengthy version the next time we meet at the club. 2♠ went two down vulnerable and was a universal zero; no adjustment required. I also privately thanked the player who called the TD for his behavior (and his partner's) at the table during the call: nobody reacted in such a way to scare them into never returning, which is important. So it appears all is well, but with one more day in the tourney we'll see if we can top this one tomorrow...
Please come back to the live game; I directed enough online during COVID for several lifetimes.
Bruce McIntyre,
#18
Posted 2013-May-12, 13:30
#19
Posted 2013-May-12, 14:32
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#20
Posted 2013-May-13, 01:06
pran, on 2013-May-11, 06:16, said:
The Secretary General of the Norwegian Bridge Federation told me some years later that they had had to drop this STOP rule because players within some Norwegian regions had "invented" a new system where STOP 1NT showed 12-14 HCP and 1NT without STOP showed 15-17 HCP.
As he said: "It was completely impossible to make these guys understand that this was illegal use of STOP!"
It should have been no surprise. What you had there was self-announcement of bid meaning, and that is obviously liable to abuse in at-the-table bridge without screens. Announcement "weak" by the bidder's partner would have been a securer way to achieve the same objective.