[Stephen Tu]

Quote

So, how are you attempting to claim that I am NOT complying with the regulations in force? Show me one rule, law, regulation that I am NOT in compliance with by waiting 10 seconds prior to replacing the STOP card in the bidding box? I don't believe you can.

We already did. Did you not read inquiry's post above, and the links I gave?

There is no penalty for leaving the stop card out longer, but it's not the ACBL recommended procedure.

The core purpose of the warning is to wake up the opponent to their obligation to pause and appear to be considering options. Whether or not the card is left out during that pause doesn't defeat the purpose of it.

The main problem with the skip bid warning, IMO, is that a large number of players do not understand *why* they are supposed to pause, they were never taught the reasoning behind it. So they ignore it, fast passing even when the stop card is used. And it is near impossible to get any adjustment for the fast pass; even though their partner might have convinced themselves to take some marginally bad action if they thought their partner might have something, it's hard to prove. Same problem with fast bids, hard to tell if they bid more aggressively than they would over a slow one. Teachers of introductory bridge courses need to include some mention of bridge ethics & proprieties IMO. Otherwise these new bridge players just don't understand and get defensive when the director is called, and get mistaken notions like they are being penalized for thinking.

Most of these people who bid quickly over the skip bids not understanding the intent of the regulation would do the same thing if you left the stop card out, IMO, so I don't think changing the procedure to leaving it out would solve things.

[bid_em_up]

Stephen Tu, on Mar 31 2007, 12:50 PM, said:

Quote

So, how are you attempting to claim that I am NOT complying with the regulations in force? Show me one rule, law, regulation that I am NOT in compliance with by waiting 10 seconds prior to replacing the STOP card in the bidding box? I don't believe you can.

We already did. Did you not read inquiry's post above, and the links I gave?

There is no penalty for leaving the stop card out longer, but it's not the ACBL recommended procedure.

The core purpose of the warning is to wake up the opponent to their obligation to pause and appear to be considering options. Whether or not the card is left out during that pause doesn't defeat the purpose of it.

The main problem with the skip bid warning, IMO, is that a large number of players do not understand *why* they are supposed to pause, they were never taught the reasoning behind it. So they ignore it, fast passing even when the stop card is used. And it is near impossible to get any adjustment for the fast pass; even though their partner might have convinced themselves to take some marginally bad action if they thought their partner might have something, it's hard to prove. Same problem with fast bids, hard to tell if they bid more aggressively than they would over a slow one. Teachers of introductory bridge courses need to include some mention of bridge ethics & proprieties IMO. Otherwise these new bridge players just don't understand and get defensive when the director is called, and get mistaken notions like they are being penalized for thinking.

Most of these people who bid quickly over the skip bids not understanding the intent of the regulation would do the same thing if you left the stop card out, IMO, so I don't think changing the procedure to leaving it out would solve things.

Stephen, please read what both of your links say, this is the first one, the other says essentially the same thing:

THE STOP CARD
Players should protect their rights and the opponent's by announcing,
prior to making any subsequent bid that skips one or more levels of
bidding.

Place the stop card so that LHO sees it (the skip bidder is
responsible for gaining LHO's attention). The skip bid is made. The
stop card is replaced in the bidding box.

NOTE: If a player forgets to replace the stop card there is no
penalty. It is each player's responsibility to maintain appropriate
tempo including after a skip bid.

It does NOT say the stop card must be IMMEDIATELY replaced in the bidding box. It does NOT say you cannot wait 10 seconds after making your bid before replacing the stop card in the bidding box. And it CERTAINLY does not prevent anyone from doing so.......as an attempt to insure that proper tempo is maintained, nor does it state that this is not allowed. In fact, if anything, I can infer that I am allowed to do so from the statement of "Players should protect their rights and the opponent's....". I am simply protecting my rights (as well as the opponents) by waiting some appropriate interval of time before replacing it in the bidding box.

So again, show me one rule, law or regulation that says I AM NOT allowed to do so, as some of you seem to be implying.

[Stephen Tu]

Note
http://web2.acbl.org/casebooks/Chicago2006...BC+%20062-7.pdf

"Secondly, the length of the time that the STOP card is on the table is meaningless. The skip bidder does not control the tempo of his left hand opponent (LHO) by how long he leaves it on the table."

There's no penalty for doing what you are doing, but you aren't really helping yourself in the ACBL. And it is not what the procedure says to do. It says to use stop card, make the bid, replace the stop card. Not make the bid - wait ten seconds, then replace the stop card. LHO is responsible for timing, whether you use stop card or not, and whether you leave it out or not; it is not you controlling the tempo.

Note also this web site
http://www.tameware..../stop_card.html
by Adam Wildavsky, a top U.S. player, who agrees with you in how he'd like the stop card to be used, leave the card out as in the WBF, but notes that the current ACBL procedure is not so and hasn't been since November 1995. Thus he tried to get it changed, but was denied.

Also read this old thread discussing these changes on rec.games.bridge :
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...ff1c7373a1c5a9/

[the hog]

jdonn, on Mar 24 2007, 11:37 AM, said:

dogsbreath, on Mar 23 2007, 06:51 PM, said:

hi

I strongly disagree that a club is a 'logical alternate'  ,, this is NOT the same as a (possible) tempo break followed by subsequent bids.

A club (or any other lead) is only a logical alternate if you shuffle your hand and pick a lead card at random.

I wouldnt lead a club on that auction unless you removed the other 8 cards from my hand

Rgds Dog

A club is NOT a logical alternative?? You need to brush up on the definition. It would probably be a majority choice, and even if I'm wrong about that it doesn't matter since it would certainly be a lot of players' choice. What you may think of a club lead doesn't matter.

The appeals committee in this case ruled correctly. They are allowed to use bridge logic as a guide. In other words, looking at east's hand she obviously WAS thinking, which when considered in conjunction with the fact that east did exceed the time limit (even if just for a little, which I sort of doubt) creates a very compelling case there was a noticeable break in tempo. This obviously creates UI that partner has a suit I should try to find, so I would disallow any lead but a club. Lack of use of the stop card has absolutely no bearing since EW have the same obligations.

The only real argument I think EW have is that a spade should be allowed since it wasn't the shortest suit. That doesn't really convince me, but it seems like their best chance. If they didn't make that argument, and didn't argue that there was no break in tempo, then the appeal is meritless.

I am very late to this. Interesting, Josh, I would regard a C lead as a logical alternative in a beginers's game, not in any game of a decent standard. For me the choice is between a S and a H. It also depends on the country in which this occurred. Aust has just recently gone from from written bidding to using bidding boxes. They do NOT have compulsory pause after the stop card is played.

[bid_em_up]

Stephen Tu, on Apr 1 2007, 02:56 AM, said:

Note
http://web2.acbl.org/casebooks/Chicago2006...BC+%20062-7.pdf

"Secondly, the length of the time that the STOP card is on the table is meaningless. The skip bidder does not control the tempo of his left hand opponent (LHO) by how long he leaves it on the table."

Sorry, Stephen. Again, that is not an official rule, law or regulation. It is another players interpretation (just as yours is) on how it should be used.

Keep trying.......

In your third example (the old rec.games thread) Adam, himself, notes:

"Yes, this change was made at the Fall '95 NABC in Atlanta. Before and during the Spring '96 NABC in Philadelphia I spoke to my district director and anyone else whose ear I could bend to see whether the board would consider changing this back to the previous policy which was the one Mr. De Wael suggested. To my mind that policy was ideal except for one problem, unfortunately quite typical for the ACBL, that it was not well publicized.

The board did make a change in Philadelphia, though it's not clear to me what it means. In the "Highlights of Board Actions" section of the March 7th daily bulletin we find

" The responsibility for pausing after a skip bid remains with left-hand opponent. However the STOP card may be left on the table until the bidder feels it is the appropriate time for LHO to bid."

----------------------------------------------------

The ACBL did change policy in 1995 from what I am claiming (leave stop card out for 10 seconds prior to replacing), to what you are (immediately replace). They then later (at the very NEXT National no less, gee, I wonder why? Actually I know why, do you?) made it acceptable to continue to leave it out.....they just did not publicize this. To the best of my knowledge, it has not been changed since.

So while it is still LHO's responsibility to wait an appropriate amount of time regardless of how long the card is displayed, it is perfectly legal (imo) for the skip bidder to wait an a reasonable amount of time prior to replacing the STOP card in the bidding box.

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Apr 1 2007, 02:56 AM, said:

There's no penalty for doing what you are doing ... [but] ... LHO is responsible for timing, whether you use stop card or not, and whether you leave it out or not; it is not you controlling the tempo.

bid_em_up, on Apr 1 2007, 12:34 PM, said:

So while it is still LHO's responsibility to wait an appropriate amount of time regardless of how long the card is displayed, it is perfectly legal (imo) for the skip bidder to wait an a reasonable amount of time prior to replacing the STOP card in the bidding box.

You both say leaving out the stop card longer is legal, but has no impact on how long LHO should take. What is this argument, it seems to me like you both agree and are arguing for the sake of arguing. Not that it isn't entertaining.

[blackshoe]

Well, I turned 60 the day before yesterday, so unless the introduction of bidding boxes and the stop card occurred before 1947, yeah, I was around. Which is not to say that I played much duplicate before about 1990.

I'll amend my assertion. If you were told that since 1993, you were misinformed.

I don't recall saying anything about original intent. AFAIR, I was addressing the current regulation, which is really all that matters.

I never said anything about what's written on the back of a stop card, either.

What I did say is what the current regulation says, and that my understanding of what it says is that the stop card is supposed to be picked up as soon as you make your bid. If you disagree with that, fine. Take it up with Mike Flader.

[blackshoe]

bid_em_up, on Apr 1 2007, 12:34 PM, said:

So while it is still LHO's responsibility to wait an appropriate amount of time regardless of how long the card is displayed, it is perfectly legal (imo) for the skip bidder to wait an a reasonable amount of time prior to replacing the STOP card in the bidding box.

This may be true. However, as has been pointed out upthread, it will make absolutely no difference to any ruling involved.