[gwnn]

Say I see an opponent grabs a certain call, then changes it to another one. The motion was quite clear, I could tell the exact call he was apparently thinking of putting on the table, but the whole thing was visible only to me. Say I haven't intentionally tried to look at what bidding card he touched but just saw it.

1. Is this whole thing authorized information to me?
2. Am I (generic I) allowed to specifically follow my opponents' mannerisms to get some hints at what he is contemplating?

[barmar]

Extraneous information from an opponent is authorized to you, but you take inference from it at your own risk.

[blackshoe]

Yes. No. See Law 74C5.

[mrdct]

Jurisdiction could be important here as in some places there are separate bidding box regulations that could come into play in situations like this where the issue of whether or not he grabbed the card "with intent" could actually require him to make the call that he's now seeking to substitute.

[blackshoe]

"Grabbed" ≠ "removed from the bidding box" (the EBU regulation) but I suppose someplace might say "grabbed" or the equivalent.

[barmar]

mrdct, on Jan 31 2010, 11:09 PM, said:

Jurisdiction could be important here as in some places there are separate bidding box regulations that could come into play in situations like this where the issue of whether or not he grabbed the card "with intent" could actually require him to make the call that he's now seeking to substitute.

That's a different question. The original question implies a jurisdiction wherethe player is allowed to touch a bidding card and then select a different one to make the call, and the question is whether the opponent is permitted to use what they saw.

[bluejak]

Yes, the opponent is permitted to use what he saw according to Peter Eidt, with which I concur.

[gwnn]

hi bluejak,

I wanted to talk to you/drink a beer with you but you suddenly left for italy. anyway, do you know what that Brogeland appeal was that delayed the last round of the Swiss for half an hour? I am really interested.

[bluejak]

No, but I have asked them to send it to me. When I get it I shall post it.

[McBruce]

I realize that:

-- bid-box actions are more out in the open than selecting a card from one's hand,

...and also that...

-- some players cannot be cured of the bad habit of "thinking while hovering" or touching every reasonable option to see which one "feels right"

...but if we have a Law against looking at a player's cards to determine which part of his hand a card came from, shouldn't we have a corresponding bid-box regulation discouraging players from watching others pull bid-box cards?

Those who telegraph their options should be warned or penalized if they continue to do so. But nobody should be watching closely enough to pick up a 0.1 second hesitation once a card is touched, or to gauge a mid-reach trajectory change.

(Not at all am I claiming that the original poster was out of line in any way.)

[blackshoe]

You are entitled, within limits, to pay attention to what is going on at the table. If you happen to notice that an opponent is playing with the bidding cards, or hovering, or whatever, there's nothing illegal in that. What's illegal is "looking intently" at him - and it's the same law as for looking to see from where he pulls a playing card, Law 74C5. I don't think we need a regulation.

[bluejak]

I do not think the idea of where a playing card comes from and a bidding box are comparable. You know the order of cards in bidding box: watching what he does tells you nothing if he just produces a card.

But when he plays a card, noticing where it comes from tells you something about his distribution.