[jillybean]

How should a misclick be handled in a tournament? Undo's are not allowed.
WBF laws dont seem to cover them

tyia
jillybean

[cherdano]

I think you should either live with them, or allow undo in the first place. That's what this checkbox is there fore, I thought

[hotShot]

In f2f bridge you cannot misclick, that is why there is no regulation for it.
If a card that could legaly be played gets visible to others you have to play it.
The only reason to take it back is to prevent a revoke.
Since revokes rarely happen at BBO, this is no topic here.

In f2f bridge while you pull out the card, it is clearly visible to you and you see, if it the wrong card, before it gets visible to others.
If you click on a card it is gone. This is why you have more unintentional played cards online.

Following the bridge laws there should be no undo. So if you allow undos, you overide the bridge laws. This is no problem since this is no offical championship or something.
ACBL events should not allow undos, because they have to follow ACBL regulations.

In a tourney everybody should be treated the same, so if one player can have an undo, all player should be allowed to do it.

If you decide that you want to deal with the bridge abilities of players and not with their ability to use a mouse properly, undos are a nice way to do that.

Bit if you allow undos it is up to the players to decide, if they accept it or not.
So as a host/director it is no longer your business.

Note:
There is no way that you can win in bridge (and this is true in many other areas too) "on your own". You win because others made more mistakes than you did. So you win because your opps misthink, misjudge or misclick. There is no way to tell if a player misclicked a card or noticed that he misthought or misjudged the situation after playing the card. there are several laws stating that a change of mind is no reason to take an action back. A misbid for example maybe corrected if you never intended to bid it. (e.g. You ask for keycards find that 2 are missing, and you want to end the auction, but instead of switsching to your agreed contract, you pass. Obviously it was not your intention to pass and if you notice that at once it can be corrected).

[epeeist]

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2005, 02:29 AM, said:

How should a misclick be handled in a tournament? Undo's are not allowed.
WBF laws dont seem to cover them 

tyia
jillybean

Your question brought to mind what I think is a related question, in a tournament that has a "no psyche" rule and also no undos, what happens if someone misclicks in the bidding (or claims a misclick) and gets a good result for that reason?

In a "normal" tournament, no problem if I misclick I say nothing and if asked what the bid means, explain to opps what the bid "should" mean (i.e. I don't say I misclicked). In a no-psyche tournament that allows undos in bidding, again no problem because I can ask for undo.

But in a no psyche, no undo tournament, what then? Is one obligated to announce that one's bid, which can't be undone, was a misclick, in order to avoid violating the "no psyche" rule?!

Oh, and though I'm not a TD, my perspective as a player on your question is, f2f bridge has revokes, accidental exposed cards, cards improperly replaced in slots, dropped on floor, etc. All of those problems are eliminated by BBO. The slight problem of misclicking seems a small price to pay for the elimination of all those other problems. When I misclick, I just accept it. Annoying, but not frequent enough for me to want undos enabled.

Oh, and I disagree with the previous poster saying if you allow undos it's up to the players. If I recall correctly, the tournaments I've played in which allowed undos in the play set a policy e.g. "reasonable undos must be granted" which meant that players could complain to TD if a reasonable undo request wasn't granted (e.g. to take an extreme example with Ax of trump you misclick and ruff in 4th seat with ace against opponent small slam...). If you're going to allow undos in a tournament, it seems to me you have to state and enforce a policy regarding them.

[Rebound]

Well I'm still of the opinion that I would rather get a good result from play rather than, say, from a misclick that results in a rediculous contract that would otherwise never occur. It seems I'm far less concerned about UI than most around here. I don't have a problem with granting undos.

[inquiry]

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2005, 03:29 AM, said:

How should a misclick be handled in a tournament? Undo's are not allowed.
WBF laws dont seem to cover them

tyia
jillybean

If Undo's are not allowed, you DON"T handle misclicks in tourneys. The old phrase "a card laid is a card played" applies exception. As a director, you could, adjust the score afterwards, but probably only if both sides agree and they request it, but then you didn't do this for every misclick in the tourney, so why favor just one pair.

If you are feeling misclicks should not be punished, allow undo's. IT will save you a lot of time as director. Use the BBO normal rules for misclick.

Ben

[jillybean]

Thanks for the replies.
A card misplayed is clear, how about a misclick in bidding? NOT a psyche a genuine misclick, these are rare but they do happen.

These misclicks are sometimes announced to the table, should they be handled the same as any table talk?

[inquiry]

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2005, 11:05 AM, said:

Thanks for the replies.
A card misplayed is clear, how about a misclick in bidding? NOT a psyche a genuine misclick, these are rare but they do happen.

These misclicks are sometimes announced to the table, should they be handled the same as any table talk?

If someone misclicks a bid, and undo's are not allowed, they should treat it as if they psyched. They are not to tell the table (or their oppoenets) that the bid was a misclick. If undo's are allowed, of course, they should immediately ask for an undo. This provides a kind of "UI" to the opponents if they reject the request, because they are aware a misclicked occured the the partner is not. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was unauthorized information...but they are in possession of info not avable to the partner of the person who asked for but did not recieve an undo.

[Elianna]

hotShot, on Apr 1 2005, 05:01 AM, said:

(1)ACBL events should not allow undos, because they have to follow ACBL regulations.
...
(2) Note:
There is no way that you can win in bridge (and this is true in many other areas too) "on your own". You win because others made more mistakes than you did. So you win because your opps misthink, misjudge or misclick. There is no way to tell if a player misclicked a card or noticed that he misthought or misjudged the situation after playing the card. there are several laws stating that a change of mind is no reason to take an action back. A misbid for example maybe corrected if you never intended to bid it. (e.g. You ask for keycards find that 2 are missing, and you want to end the auction, but instead of switsching to your agreed contract, you pass. Obviously it was not your intention to pass and if you notice that at once it can be corrected).

(My numbers added)

(1)This is not entirely true (that the ACBL regulations for f2f tournaments don't allow undos). For example, when bidding, if you intend to bid 2s, and pull out 2h by accident, if you catch it immediately, you are allowed to change that bid. (ie, you're allowed to make finger errors, but not mental errors.)

(2) I believe that actually, for this kind of misbid, (by ACBL rules, but I have no idea about WBF) allow you to change your bid, but your score is capped (I forget by how much). This is done to protect the field, and not reward opponents, but cannot restore you to a good place.

I hope that this all showed up ok. It's the first time I've tried quoting something.

[hotShot]

I don't think ACBL and WDF regulation are different in this case.
In fact your example and mine are handled by the same law.

You are allowed to chance a missbid unpunished, if you did not intend to make it. There is no need for a punishment nor is there an UI because the bid made, was never intended so it contained no information at all.
Important is that you can prove it is not a chance of mind. Timing plays an important role here.

[puidedac]

try checking out this link to the online bridge laws
http://www.domain.comhttp://www.ecatsbridg...aws/default.asp

i am beginner when comes to bridge laws maybe u can identify there your answer. but to me seems same laws applies to live bridge as they apply to online bridge so misclicks are not recognized.

[sceptic]

my view on misclicks is as follows.

NO undos are granted for any reason, if you make a mistake this will teach you to be more aware next time...

most misclicks are caused by, drinking coffee or doing something other than paying attention at the table, so NO undos, just be more careful

[jillybean]

inquiry, on Apr 1 2005, 08:11 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Apr 1 2005, 11:05 AM, said:

Thanks for the replies.
A card misplayed is clear, how about a misclick in bidding? NOT a psyche a genuine misclick, these are rare but they do happen.

These misclicks are sometimes announced to the table, should they be handled the same as any table talk?

If someone misclicks a bid, and undo's are not allowed, they should treat it as if they psyched. They are not to tell the table (or their oppoenets) that the bid was a misclick. If undo's are allowed, of course, they should immediately ask for an undo. This provides a kind of "UI" to the opponents if they reject the request, because they are aware a misclicked occured the the partner is not. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was unauthorized information...but they are in possession of info not avable to the partner of the person who asked for but did not recieve an undo.

Thanks,
How do you then handle a situation where there has been a misclick in the bidding and it has been announced to the table?
A-=

jillybean2

[hotShot]

If annouced in time bids can be changed. Sometimes with severe penalties, like partner is not allowed to bid any more or if the other side is playing there might be lead penalties.
But the f2f rules want to produce a result almost at all costs.
In this case a UI was given and the partner of the player who announced it is the only one who is not allowed to use it. So bidding should go on, and you have to check, if his partner is bidding as he would bid, without the UI.

You can hardly enfoce this at online bridge. The players might just log off.

If you cannot produce a played result, you have to assign an artificial score. Is always A+ for the nonoffending side. The offending side should get A-.

[luke warm]

sceptic, on Apr 2 2005, 01:54 PM, said:

my view on misclicks is as follows.

NO undos are granted for any reason, if you make a mistake this will teach you to be more aware next time...

most misclicks are caused by, drinking coffee or doing something other than paying attention at the table, so NO undos, just be more careful

wow ... my view is, grant them whenever asked... unlike sceptic, i can't know why one misclicked..

[Cascade]

jillybean2, on Apr 3 2005, 08:43 AM, said:

How do you then handle a situation where there has been a misclick in the bidding and it has been announced to the table?
A-=

jillybean2

The ethics of this situation is that the partner of the player that has made an announcement to the table must bid as if he has not seen the announcement. An announcement like this is one form of Unauthorized Information (UI).

When this occurs the laws of bridge state:

"After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information." L16A

What this means in practice is that a player that has available to him must make "middle of the road bids" and not take actions that in any way could have been suggested by the UI.

Depending on the nature of the UI this could result in anything from no change from a normal result, through slightly inferior contracts to completely ridiculous contracts.

e.g. if you misclick 1NT instead of 1♠ then all of the following can happen legally ...

1. Partner might have 10 hcps and raise you to 3NT and that is an ok contract since you have 15 hcp and five spades and partner has no fit for spades;

2. 3NT is a little too high because you only have 11 points. It may also be the wrong denomination if you have six spades and partner has a spade fit. Some of the time you will get lucky and two or three finesses or breaks will work and you will make your 3NT. More often you will go down perhaps several;

3. Partner has 17 points and bids a slam which is hopeless. Again occasionally it might make with some good fortune in the play.

4. Partner with four spades tries Stayman and you find your spade fit and get to game. However you have no way to show your singleton and side five-card suit so you miss an excellent slam.

There are many other examples of this type.

In none of the cases above would you need to adjust the score.

The bad results are likely after the misclick but the occasional good results are 'rub of the greeen' - a golfing term for when you hit a bad shot and then get a good bounce that is just your good luck.

Here is an example of a situation where I had unauthorized information and got lucky when I thought I was destined for a bad score.

Scoring: IMPs

---

I elected to open 1♣ and my LHO overcalled 1♦. Partner then bid 1♠ and my RHO passed.

Our relevant methods in this situation were:

2♦ would be a general force - cue-bid

3♦ would be a splinter agreeing spades

4♦ would be exclusion Roman Key Card showing a void and asking for Aces but discounting the ♦A.

I bid 4♦ and LHO asked my partner what 4♦ meant. My partner had forgotten the system and told the table that she had "no idea". LHO doubled and my partner bid 4♠.

Now after interference in an Ace-Asking situation we play P0D1 or P0R1. Actually her responses would be as follows:

Pass - 0 or 3 key cards
Redouble - 1 or 4 key cards
4♥ (next step) - 2 key cards and no Queen
4♠ - 2 key cards with the spade Queen.

As you can see opposite two key cards and the trump queen 6♠ is an excellent contract. However I had Unauthorized Information that it was unlikely that this was what my partner was showing. Nevertheless I was obligated to bid 6♠.

Luckily partner put down two key cards and the trump queen and slam was there. Since she didn't know what was happening in the auction she decided to just 'sign-off' in 4♠.

On the other hand sometimes a player will take advantage of Unauthorized Information. Returning to my example where you misclick 1NT when you intended 1♠ ...

Knowing partner has five spades

5. you jump to 4♠ on a three card suit

6. you bid Stayman with 3-3 in the majors and find your spade fit - this might be ok for some pairs that play that 1NT can have a five-card suit and they have a method to find that fit

7. Inviting game with 10 hcp since you know that partner does not necessarily have 15-17 hcp.

There are other examples of a similar nature.

In all of these cases you would adjust the score.

The adjustment that you should make is to try and work out what would have happened if the player did not take advantage of the unauthorized information.

If there is a choice of actions then you choose the worst result that was "at all probable" for the offending side and the best result that was "likely" for the non-offending side.

Usually you should try to avoid giving Av- Av+ in these situations but you might have to if it gets messy.

I hope this is helpful.

[Cascade]

hotshot is correct it is possible to allow a change of call

L25A
"Until his partner makes a call, a player may substitute his intended call for an inadvertent call but only if he does so, or attempts to do so, without pause for thought. If legal, his last call stands without penalty; if illegal, it is subject to the applicable Law."

L25B
"Until LHO calls, a call may be substituted when Section A does not apply:
1. Substitute Call Condoned
The substituted call may be accepted (treated as legal) at the option of offender’s LHO ; then, the second call stands and the auction proceeds without penalty. If offender’s LHO has called before attention is drawn to the infraction and the Director determines that LHO intended his call to apply over the offender’s original call at that turn, offender’s substituted call stands without penalty, and LHO may withdraw his call without penalty (but see Law 16C2).
2. Not Condoned
If the substituted call is not accepted, it is cancelled, and
(a) First Call Illegal
if the first call was illegal, the offender is subject to the applicable law (and the lead penalties of Law 26 may apply to the second call).
( First Call Legal
if the first call was legal, the offender must either
(1) Let First Call Stand
allow his first call to stand, in which case (penalty) his partner must pass when next it is his turn to call (see Law 23 when the pass damages the non-offending side), or,
(2) Substitute Another Call
make any other legal call, in which case (penalty) the auction proceeds normally (but offender’s partner may not base calls on information from withdrawn calls); the offending side may receive no score greater than average minus (see Law 12C1).
© Lead Penalties
In either case ( (1) or ( (2) above, the offender’s partner will be subject to a lead penalty (see Law 26) if he becomes a defender."