Help
I agree with your motivation here and I think online “bridge” is slowly being destroyed. However I do not think it is a software issue. Neither the people running the games or those playing are interested in the laws or they believe they are already following the laws. No matter what gadgets you introduce I think they will still run games how they please.
Nosy Opponents - Full Disclosure Recent News Topic
#21
- hooked
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,794
- Joined: 2003-November-15
- Gender:Female
- Location:Vancouver, Canada
- Interests:Multi
Posted 2009-April-08, 01:15
“It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult.”
"You need to play a lot of stuff these days just to deal with the stuff your opponents are playing" DBurn
"You need to play a lot of stuff these days just to deal with the stuff your opponents are playing" DBurn
#22
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 22,133
- Joined: 2004-August-21
- Gender:Male
Posted 2009-April-08, 15:11
If there were no button to ask what a bid means, they would just hound you in the chat area.
Perhaps the problem is with the notion of self-alerts. In f2f bridge we ask for explanations from the partner of the bidder. In this case, we may get the anwer "We haven't discussed it", and we'll take this answer as implying "I don't know", which is reasonable. But when the explanations come from the bidder, there's no implied "I don't know", because the bidder obviously knows what he has, and made the bid with the intent to show it.
So even though there shouldn't be any difference, players feel like something unfair is happening in the self-alert case. But we continue to use self-alerts because most of the time it's an improvement over the partner-alert system used in f2f bridge. Unfortunately, many TDs seem to have the same misconception as players, and enforce the rules incorrectly.
Perhaps the problem is with the notion of self-alerts. In f2f bridge we ask for explanations from the partner of the bidder. In this case, we may get the anwer "We haven't discussed it", and we'll take this answer as implying "I don't know", which is reasonable. But when the explanations come from the bidder, there's no implied "I don't know", because the bidder obviously knows what he has, and made the bid with the intent to show it.
So even though there shouldn't be any difference, players feel like something unfair is happening in the self-alert case. But we continue to use self-alerts because most of the time it's an improvement over the partner-alert system used in f2f bridge. Unfortunately, many TDs seem to have the same misconception as players, and enforce the rules incorrectly.