[Trinidad]

 barmar, on 2013-August-08, 22:06, said:

For some reason, she thought that my use of the Stop card suggested an unusual meaning that she should ask about.

I wouldn't put it exactly like that. But when an opponent uses the Stop card, you are supposed to think or act as if you are thinking. That means that you need to know what the opponent's bid means or act as if you need to know what the opponent's bid means. Therefore, you ask (or look at the CC or remember). This is particularly true for alerted bids or bids where the alert regulations are unclear or not universally understood.

Furthermore, what better way could there be to spend the mandatory x seconds than by making sure you understand the auction (which you will have to do before you start defending anyway)?

Rik

[blackshoe]

So, when the opening bidder puts out the stop card, and then bids 2♣, we should ask "please explain your auction"?

[aguahombre]

 Trinidad, on 2013-August-08, 23:41, said:

Furthermore, what better way could there be to spend the mandatory x seconds than by making sure you understand the auction (which you will have to do before you start defending anyway)?

I don't think so. The allegedly mandatory x seconds begin after any Q&A. Otherwise, the player is not really pausing at all.

[RMB1]

 aguahombre, on 2013-August-09, 00:30, said:

I don't think so. The allegedly mandatory x seconds begin after any Q&A. ...

Is this an ACBL regulation?

The EBU regulations just say the Stop card is left on the table for 10 seconds (and LHO should not call until the Stop card has been removed). There is no allowance for the 10 seconds to start after questions.

[Lanor Fow]

In the spirit of the 'Stop' procedure though you woudl imagine it should start after the explination. If the purpose is to allow time to think, one can hardly begin to do this before the bid is explained (if you need it explaining). Some explinations, moreover, may take a substantial part of the ten seconds. I would be loath to rule a hesitation if a play bid after 15 second after a stop bid, nine of which were taken up by the explination of the bid.

[pran]

 Lanor Fow, on 2013-August-09, 05:34, said:

In the spirit of the 'Stop' procedure though you woudl imagine it should start after the explination. If the purpose is to allow time to think, one can hardly begin to do this before the bid is explained (if you need it explaining). Some explinations, moreover, may take a substantial part of the ten seconds. I would be loath to rule a hesitation if a play bid after 15 second after a stop bid, nine of which were taken up by the explination of the bid.

FWIW: The Norwegian regulation on STOP explicitly state that the STOP period begins after opponents have received answers to possible questions on the meaning of the call.

(It further states that the player presenting the STOP card or saying "STOP" is responsible for timing the STOP period which shall last about 10 Seconds. He does so by taking back the STOP card or saying "PROCEED" at the end of the period.)

[blackshoe]

 RMB1, on 2013-August-09, 01:44, said:

Is this an ACBL regulation?

The EBU regulations just say the Stop card is left on the table for 10 seconds (and LHO should not call until the Stop card has been removed). There is no allowance for the 10 seconds to start after questions.

The ACBL regulation is the same.

[barmar]

The ACBL regulation http://web2.acbl.org...Section%20A.pdf says:

Quote

C. Opponents of Skip Bidder
1. All Players
When RHO has announced a skip bid, the player following the skip bidder must wait for a
suitable interval (about 10 seconds). In waiting the player's manner must be one that
suggests he is an active participant in the auction (the hand should be studied during pause).
any obvious display of disinterest is most improper.

2. Experienced Players
Experienced players expected to maintain proper temp whether a skip bid is announced or
not.

D. Questioning
After a skip bid, players may ask questions but must still pause an appropriate amount of
time for study.

Anyway, I don't see what this has to do with the situation in question. The Stop card doesn't relate to the meaning of the bid. She seemed to indicate that she asked about the bid because the Stop card suggested it had an unusual meaning (despite the fact that my partner didn't alert it), NOT because that was something to do during the required hesitation time.

She never actually said what she thought the significance of the Stop card was. I inferred this from the way she repeatedly emphasized "He put out the stop card" when she was explaining what happened to the director. This was during a heated exchange, because they were also stating things that weren't true (like that partner DID alert my 2♣, when the only thing that was alerted was his 2♦ response), and he was trying to correct them. It's like they somehow mistook my Stop card for his Alert card.

[blackshoe]

Ah. I suppose the "codification" has the official regulation. This page has somewhat different wording and doesn't address questions.

[blackshoe]

"he was trying to correct them"

Which he? Your partner, or the director?

One of the things that drives me nuts, as player or director, in a ruling situation, is when multiple people start talking at once. If I'm a director, I can put a stop to it (It has so far only once got to "the next person who opens his mouth without my permission is getting a disciplinary penalty"). If I'm a player, boy do I want to say something, but I can't. When the opps finally wind down, and hopefully before the TD makes his ruling, I'm going to say "may I have the floor now?" but it's hard to sit there and listen to them spout BS.

FWIW, IMO the protocol is this: whoever called the TD gets the floor on the TD's arrival. Nobody should interrupt. When that person is done talking, the TD should ask if anyone else has anything to say, and designate the next person to speak (probably someone from the other side) if someone does want to say something. Only after he's heard from all parties (possibly more than once) is it time to make a ruling. But the TD must keep control of the table, or things will get out of hand.

[Trinidad]

 aguahombre, on 2013-August-09, 00:30, said:

I don't think so. The allegedly mandatory x seconds begin after any Q&A. Otherwise, the player is not really pausing at all.

That is partially true. The whole point of the procedure is to make it look as if you are thinking about your action. This means that you can think while asking and you can think while you get an answer (or the opponent is thinking about the answer). You don't win 100% of the invested time back, but you save some time.

Furthermore, it is pretty dumb if you wait for 10 seconds after the 2♣ bid, then pass, let the auction finish and then have to ask about the meaning of the whole auction (particulalrly if you just wanted to know whether this was going to be a "Strong 2♣" auction or a "Precision 2♣" auction).

Just compare:
STOP: 2♣..
- "Yes please?"
"Strong and artificial"
- "Thank you. 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9...Pass"
    -2♦-Pass-2♠
Pass-4♣-Pass-4♦
Pass-4♥-Pass-4♠
Pass-4NT-Pass-5♦
Pass-6♠-Pass-Pass
Pass

to

STOP: 2♣
1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.. Pass-2♦-Pass-2♠
Pass-4♣-Pass-4♦
Pass-4♥-Pass-4♠
Pass-4NT-Pass-5♦
Pass-6♠-Pass-Pass
Pass

"Please explain..."
- "Well.. 2♣ was strong and artificial. 2♦ was waiting. 2♠ was natural. 4♣ was a splinter. 4♦ and 4♥ were cues - first or second round. 4♠ was.. er well .. not enough to go on by itself. 4NT was RKCB 1430. 5♦ showed 3 (or 0). And he wanted to play 6♠, so I passed."

I know which opponent I would like to have in a fast pairs.

Rik

This post has been edited by Trinidad: 2013-August-10, 13:18

[blackshoe]

Heh. There's at least one bid missing out of those.

I would explain the auction in the second case this way: "opener has shown a strong GF unbalanced hand <insert criteria here>, at least 5 spades, first or second round control of both round suits, and the values to go to slam opposite responder's hand. Responder has shown no good suit of his own, a spade fit, mild slam interest, first or second round control of diamonds, and 3 keycards* for spades."

The thing that drives me nuts when I ask "please explain your auction" at the Clarification period is "well, he bid..." If I wanted a review of the bidding, I'd have asked for one.

* if opener would ask for keycards and then go to slam opposite zero, why didn't he ask for kings (in case there's a grand)?

I wrote "mild slam interest" because of Rik's description of 4♠ as "not enough to go on by itself". Yet responder has 3 keycards, at least two of which he has not yet shown. Perhaps this means he has AK of spades? Anyway, with two not-yet-shown keycards, bidding 4♠ seems a little wimpy.

[Trinidad]

 blackshoe, on 2013-August-10, 09:45, said:

Heh. There's at least one bid missing out of those.

You are right. I fixed it.

 blackshoe, on 2013-August-10, 09:45, said:

I would explain the auction in the second case this way: "opener has shown a strong GF unbalanced hand <insert criteria here>, at least 5 spades, first or second round control of both round suits, and the values to go to slam opposite responder's hand. Responder has shown no good suit of his own, a spade fit, mild slam interest, first or second round control of diamonds, and 3 keycards* for spades."

Now, what goes faster: Asking after the auction or asking during the auction?

The point is that most people can figure this entire thing out during the auction - as long as they know that 2♣ was strong and artificial. There is no need to waste all this extra time. (If there would be something else going on there would be a post alert.)

But now, suppose that the opponents are playing Precision and think that a natural 2♣ opening doesn't need an alert? You would assign a completely different meaning to the whole auction. However, again, if you knew from the start that they were playing Precision, you can pretty much figure out the whole auction as it is proceeding: 4♣ sets clubs as trumps (for now). 4♦, 4♥ and 4♠ were cues. 4NT was RKCB (1430). 5♦ showed 0 or 3 keycards for clubs. 6♠ is the contract.

So, if you know from the start whether they are playing something SAYC like (2/1, Acol, ..) or Precision like (Polish club, Swedish club, ...) you are capable of understanding the whole auction without any need for additional questions. But if you don't know what 2♣ meant, you will be clueless for 6 rounds of bidding and the opponents will have to spell out the whole auction for you before you can start thinking about your opening lead. In contrast, if you know the meaning of 2♣ from the start, you can have your lead ready by the time the last pass card is put on the table.

I think that makes a large difference in a speedball tournament.

Rik

[blackshoe]

It is a good idea to look at opponents' convention card at the beginning of the round, even if the regulations in force don't require it.

I do wish the ACBL would require convention cards be exchanged at the start of the round, and not returned until the end. But that would require getting the *(&^)* personal score off the damn thing.

[Trinidad]

 blackshoe, on 2013-August-10, 15:50, said:

It is a good idea to look at opponents' convention card at the beginning of the round, even if the regulations in force don't require it.

I do wish the ACBL would require convention cards be exchanged at the start of the round, and not returned until the end. But that would require getting the *(&^)* personal score off the damn thing.

I fully agree -in general- but barmar wrote about the "fast pairs". Do people really study convention cards at speedball events?

Rik

[blackshoe]

Dunno, it's been a long time since I played in one.

[barmar]

 Trinidad, on 2013-August-10, 17:41, said:

I fully agree -in general- but barmar wrote about the "fast pairs". Do people really study convention cards at speedball events?

Rik

Almost no one studies the opponents' CC in the ACBL in any event. Some people will take a quick scan of it at the beginning of a match in a team game, but practically never in short pair game rounds. Everyone just relies on the alert procedure.

[barmar]

 blackshoe, on 2013-August-10, 08:43, said:

"he was trying to correct them"

Which he? Your partner, or the director?

My partner (how could the TD correct an incorrect description of what happened during the auction, he wasn't there at that time?).

The director was trying to calm everyone down, but they were all talking over each other. It was a very unfortunate situation, all three players were behaving badly, and not letting the TD take control.

It probably didn't help that the TD who came to the table was local to me and my partner (I've been friends with him about 25 years).

[blackshoe]

Hm. Well, to quote Sister Mary Elephant, "claaass… claaass… SHUT UP!!!"

After that, if they don't shut up, I start handing out DPs. Even to my friends.

[aguahombre]

 barmar, on 2013-August-10, 21:24, said:

The director was trying to calm everyone down, but they were all talking over each other. It was a very unfortunate situation, all three players were behaving badly, and not letting the TD take control.

It probably didn't help that the TD who came to the table was local to me and my partner (I've been friends with him about 25 years).

Has he been directing for that long, or just been a friend for that long? Seasoned directors ---friend or stranger --- should have developed enough people skills to control a table.

At a recent Regional in Las Vegas, I noticed the younger TD's have a long way to go in developing such skills.