[wank]

yes but there's a right way to phrase the question and a wrong way. if you ask about the whole auction or the 5H bid in general terms and get a half answer then you can ask a follow up. if you ask specifically about the queen without reference to anything else it's pokeresque.

[Jinksy]

ahydra, on 2015-June-11, 07:58, said:

I think this bit is very confusing



as it talks about you being the one passing 4NT when in fact you were the one who bid 4NT.

ahydra

Sigh, that's what I get for rushing before bedtime. Fixed diagram in OP.

[Jinksy]

helene_t, on 2015-June-12, 01:08, said:

Back to OP: that kind of nonsense questioning can be a bit annoying and as a td I might have a word with North about wasting time and leaking (mis) info but I would not adjust. The question sounds unlikely to be aimed at bidding decisions. Don't read anything into it other than general curiosity or smartassness. The finesse has 50% chance.

So this does seem peculiar in that there seems to be some sort of claim passed around - and I'm not sure from this thread whether it has any legitimacy - that you should ask about the bidding if you're not considering a call other than pass. If this injunction does exist, what sort of substance does it have, if (as it sounds here) there's no penalty from persistently ignoring it?

[Zelandakh]

Trinidad, on 2015-June-11, 11:45, said:

You play in an environment where 1/3 of the field plays 5♥ as 2 aces, 1/3 as 2 keycards (no info about the queen) and 1/3 as RKCB (2 keys, no queen).

You can differentiate these by asking what a 5♠ response would have meant instead or, sometimes, just by asking for the player to be more specific (without reference to any specific cards). I have to admit this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts too though.

As an aside, I assume the system in play for the OP was Fantunes and it is often the case that players feel they are not being told everything when playing against an unfamiliar system, so it might well be that she was in that mind-set and simply asking about everything. Or she might think of you and your partner as "system people" and want to show off that she knows some things too. Lots of possibilities offer themselves.

[VixTD]

Jinksy, on 2015-June-13, 10:45, said:

So this does seem peculiar in that there seems to be some sort of claim passed around - and I'm not sure from this thread whether it has any legitimacy - that you should ask about the bidding if you're not considering a call other than pass. If this injunction does exist, what sort of substance does it have, if (as it sounds here) there's no penalty from persistently ignoring it?

I think this is a very tricky topic. Law 73 deals with legal and illegal communication with partner, and legal and illegal deception. It might be useful to look at tempo breaks and questions asked, as the legal distinction between the two is often lost on players:

Although they should try to maintain a steady tempo, players have the right to stop and think about a call or play, so long as they have a genuine bridge reason for doing so (law 73D1). They may not vary tempo deliberately in order to mislead the opponents (73D2), or to communicate something to partner (73B). Partner must take care to avoid drawing inferences from such tempo breaks (73C). Opponents may draw whatever inference they wish, but at their own risk (73D1).

Players have a right to ask questions about the opponents' bidding and plays (law 21). There is no law that specifically says they may not ask unless the answer is likely to affect their action at that turn (a popular misconception), but they may not ask solely for partner's benefit (law 21G1), they may not ask in order to communicate something to partner (law 73B1), nor in order to mislead an opponent (law 73D2). Again, partner must carefully avoid using any inference from the fact that partner has chosen to ask a question (law 73C). Opponents may draw whatever inference they like (16A2).

Law 73F gives the TD the authority to award an adjusted score, but only when an innocent opponent has drawn a false inference from an action that was in violation of the proprieties of law 73. In the case of a tempo break, it's often easy to rule that the player had no demonstrable reason for hesitating and so was in breach of law 73D1, which requires players to take care not to vary tempo when to do so may work to the benefit of their side. In the case of a question asked when there was no reason for the player to need to know the answer at that turn, what law or propriety has been broken? The TD would have to rule that the question had been asked in order to mislead an opponent, or in order to communicate with partner, before they could adjust the score.

This leaves directors and players in a difficult situation. Has a player asked a question because they genuinely needed to know the answer there and then, or because it is their habit to ask every time they don't understand a call or play? You see some people on this forum discussing strategies for randomising when they will ask questions to avoid passing information, but unless the TD and the opponents can be sure they really stick to such agreements it can be difficult to dispel the notion that they've asked in the full knowledge that doing so might hoodwink the opponents.

[aguahombre]

VixTD, on 2015-June-15, 12:13, said:

This leaves directors and players in a difficult situation. You see some people on this forum discussing strategies for randomising when they will ask questions to avoid passing information, but unless the TD and the opponents can be sure they really stick to such agreements it can be difficult to dispel the notion that they've asked in the full knowledge that doing so might hoodwink the opponents.

Being consistent about when we will ask questions is 1) not randomizing and 2) a policy which can be articulated. The times when it matters UI-wise are those where we ask and then pass.

We ask about alerted calls in the first two rounds of an auction, and ask when we are still alive competitively. This might be called a strategy, but it is quite easy for the TD and opponents to grasp.

[Aardv]

Jinksy, on 2015-June-13, 10:45, said:

So this does seem peculiar in that there seems to be some sort of claim passed around - and I'm not sure from this thread whether it has any legitimacy - that you should ask about the bidding if you're not considering a call other than pass. If this injunction does exist, what sort of substance does it have, if (as it sounds here) there's no penalty from persistently ignoring it?

The EBU offers advice along those lines:

Blue Book 2E1 said:

A player has the right to ask questions at his turn to call or play, but exercising this right may have consequences. If a player shows unusual interest in one or more calls of the auction, then this may give rise to unauthorised information. His partner must avoid taking advantage. It may be in a player’s interests to defer questions until either he is about to make the opening lead or his partner’s lead is face-down on the table.

However, that's not an injunction. Personally I like to have an idea what's going on during the auction, but I prefer looking at the convention card to asking questions.

[VixTD]

aguahombre, on 2015-June-15, 12:39, said:

Being consistent about when we will ask questions is 1) not randomizing and 2) a policy which can be articulated. The times when it matters UI-wise are those where we ask and then pass.

We ask about alerted calls in the first two rounds of an auction, and ask when we are still alive competitively. This might be called a strategy, but it is quite easy for the TD and opponents to grasp.

The problem is not that we can't grasp the concept of always asking in certain situations, or asking randomly, it's that we can't be sure that you genuinely stick to your claimed strategy. I've met a few villains at the bridge table who'll claim anything to avoid an adverse ruling, and plenty more who probably believe they do what they say they do, but actually don't. If you always ask in set situations you may think it's easy to prove that you do: you could ask the TD to go round the field asking everyone you've played so far, or everyone you play against regularly, and ask them to verify it, but I think you'd be surprised at how few people actually register that you do this. It's also an impossible burden for the TD.

Asking always is fine for reducing UI passed to partner, but how does it help the opponents, who don't know you and might think you're an "ask-if-you-need-to-know" sort of person, and play you for the missing goods? Do you tell them in advance of your asking proclivities?

[barmar]

I don't think 73D1 is restricted only to tempo, it says "maintain steady tempo and unvarying manner". I think questions, particularly the way you ask them, fall under "manner". This is probably where EBU gets their guideline about "showing unusual interest" from -- if you ask questions that emphasize a particular suit, that's not an unvarying manner, and the TD may be able to adjust under 73F.