Peter Smulders | 4 Feb 15:02 2016
Picon

Re: Explaining why I'm so cautious

After all we have a Bridge Laws Mailing List. For those curious about 
the Bridge Law enforcement in Pattaya:
http://pattayaone.net/pattaya-news/221251/british-led-card-room-raided-officials-south-pattaya/

>From: "a.witzen" <a.witzen <at> upcmail.nl>
>Precedence: list
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Bridge Laws Mailing List <blml <at> rtflb.org>
>Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 11:32:43 +0100
>Reply-To: Bridge Laws Mailing List <blml <at> rtflb.org>
>Message-ID: <q4xsc9g4qsh25aqcob5f4g5y.1454581963801 <at> email.android.com>
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>         boundary="--_com.android.email_96703924454270"
>Subject: Re: [BLML] Explaining why I'm so cautious
>Message: 2
>
>I just read that in pattaya, the sin city of thailand, 32 old expats 
>playing bridge were raidedby 50 policeman and put in prison for 12 
>hours. They were rekeased after paying 5000 bath each as bail.
>So be careful when you want to play bridge in thailand,
>For more, see
>Www.thailandblig.nl in dutch

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

agot | 4 Feb 13:15 2016
Picon
Picon

Re: Mankad

Le 04.02.2016 11:07, brian a écrit :
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 18:33:47 +1100, you wrote:
> 
>> Trick question: When is a completely legal action (consistent with the
>> rules as currently written) by a player also a completely unethical 
>> action
>> by that player?
>> 
> Having partnered at least three physically handicapped players over
> the course of the last 40 years, I would offer demanding a penalty for
> an infraction caused solely by a physical disability.
> 

Since creating UI (e.g. from tempo) isn't an infraction per se, there 
are several such possible cases. Perhaps "completely unethical" is a bit 
strong, but unethical nevertheless.

For example, since we all can recognize a weak two-bid when we see one, 
a player who uses complex two-way two-bids (either a weak 2-bid in the 
1-above suit or a variety of strong hands) and hesitates quite a bit 
before making one gives out UI that he has the strong type and was 
cheking what the right opening was with that particular type. Since 
there was a reason for the tempo, this is 100% proper, but ...

Best regards

   Alain
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
(Continue reading)

Richard Hills | 4 Feb 08:33 2016
Picon

Mankad

Trick question: When is a completely legal action (consistent with the rules as currently written) by a player also a completely unethical action by that player?


Best wishes,

Richard Hills
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
agot | 2 Feb 17:44 2016
Picon
Picon

Explaining why I'm so cautious

Dear blmlists,

Since I've been criticized for being uncertain about the "racecars" 
incident, I'll try to explain here how it might be a problem - at least 
according to my appreciation.

1993 Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup semi-finals - so no klutzes around.

KJ            Qxxx
xxx           Axx
AJxxxx        Kxx
xx            AKx

After uneventful bidding -no overcall-, you play 3NT from the East hand.
The lead is a Heart royal, encouraging signal from North, small to the 
Jack, small and you eventually take the third round. It's a virtual 
certainty that the 13th Heart is in South's hand, even if the other 
royal was played to the third trick.

Diamond king, small from both opponents, small Diamond, small from 
South, and decision time.
Unless I'm badly wrong, it's superior to finesse.

If you play the Ace, you win with 22 Diamonds. This, allowing for 
"slots", is about 55%.
If you finesse, you win either with Qxx in South's hand or with Spade 
Ace in North's, a 70+% chance.

Yet, three out of four declarers who were in this situation didn't 
finesse (another one didn't either, but she was in a slightly different 
situation, after South's overcall).

Now, say you're called by some North player, who claims West saw / 
looked at one's cards and made a Churchillian sign.

East just explains to you that one "felt like not finessing". Or that 
one's opponent handled one's cards in such a way that one could see 
them. Or anything unconvincing.

Shouldn't you be careful, as the only testimony about a possible 
information given by dummy is from a person who's far from neutral in 
the case ? Testis unus, testis nullius. No testimony from anybody else, 
no video proof, only your strong feeling that something isn't kosher.

You know 100% that somebody is a liar -either North or East. Both would 
get an advantage if they were believed.

So, why do you believe North more than East ?

That's what the Racecars incident is all about.

Until I get a strongly argumented answer to the above question, I'll 
keep considering the case wasn't properly handled.

Best regards,

   Alain

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

José Júlio Curado | 30 Jan 19:39 2016
Picon

Running scores

Hi!

I would like to know what is your opinion regarding showing running scores in Bridge Tournaments?

Does it make any difference if it is Pairs or Teams?

Does it make any difference if the boards are barometer circulated or not?

Does it make any difference if is IMPs or Matcpoints?

Does it make any difference if prizes are involved?

Thank you very much in advance for your input.
Jose Julio Curado
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Larry | 26 Jan 17:10 2016
Picon

Re: Coincidence rules OK

I certainly remember two occasions.

One, deciding between 2H (Acol Strong) and 2C...after several traumatic 
reconsiderations, I accidentally passed.

Two, after pards 1N, I was deciding between a conservative 3N or 4N...again 
accidentally passed.

It 'appens, but, of course, in this case I would be very wary.

L

Haven't any of you had that happen to you? You look at your hand - consider
a call - decide against it - and automatically put a pass card on the table
without bothering to consider all options.

This was not a mechanical error, it was a brain failure. There have been 4
passes and the cards are returned to the board.

Of the 3/4 times that has happened to me in 35 years, I suspect only once
was it a success. Maybe this was his ONCE!!

Anne

-----Original Message-----
From: blml-bounces <at> rtflb.org [mailto:blml-bounces <at> rtflb.org] On Behalf Of
Jeff Easterson
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 12:59 PM
To: Bridge Laws Mailing List
Subject: Re: [BLML] Coincidence rules OK

Seems (to me) a curious decision to pass.  How did he/she explain it?
Don't they have alternative bids for such hands, such as 1 club or 1
diamond, etc.?  Before deciding I'd like to know more about the player?
What is his history/reputation?  A gambler? Irrational?  Although I am at
least a theoretical supporter of the rule of coincidence and have
occasionally applied it, one must be very careful and certain.

Ciao,  JE

Am 26.01.2016 um 11:47 schrieb Richard Hills:
> Queen Elizabeth rules UK
>
> Australian Mixed Teams, 14 adjacent tables sharing computer-dealt
> boards (permitting the distribution of hand records at the conclusion
> of each Swiss match).
>
> North-South are playing the Aussie version of Standard American,
> whereby a 1NT opening bid promises 15-18 hcp.
>
> With East-West vulnerable, as dealer South held:
>
> AKJ9
> Q6
> K865
> AQ7
>
> South correctly determined that his hand was too strong to open 1NT,
> so therefore South elected to Pass. Unsurprisingly the board was
> passed out. At the other 13 tables the normal 3NT contract was
> reached, which had to fail by one or more tricks due to bad breaks and
> finesses failing. Hence North-South gained imps on the board.
>
> As Director would you automatically adjust the score, due to you
> automatically applying the Rule of Coincidence and/or you
> automatically ruling that South was in receipt of subconscious UI?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Richard Hills
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml <at> rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml 

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

Richard Hills | 26 Jan 11:47 2016
Picon

Coincidence rules OK

Queen Elizabeth rules UK


Australian Mixed Teams, 14 adjacent tables sharing computer-dealt boards (permitting the distribution of hand records at the conclusion of each Swiss match).

North-South are playing the Aussie version of Standard American, whereby a 1NT opening bid promises 15-18 hcp.

With East-West vulnerable, as dealer South held:

AKJ9
Q6
K865
AQ7

South correctly determined that his hand was too strong to open 1NT, so therefore South elected to Pass. Unsurprisingly the board was passed out. At the other 13 tables the normal 3NT contract was reached, which had to fail by one or more tricks due to bad breaks and finesses failing. Hence North-South gained imps on the board.

As Director would you automatically adjust the score, due to you automatically applying the Rule of Coincidence and/or you automatically ruling that South was in receipt of subconscious UI?

Best wishes,

Richard Hills
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Jeff Easterson | 26 Jan 06:57 2016
Picon
Picon

??

I haven't received any postings on blml for about a week?  Have there 
been none or have I been mysteriously "unsubscribed" again?

Ciao,  JE

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Robert Frick | 16 Jan 03:07 2016

Running a suit from the top, can you stop?

If you say you are running a suit from the top, can you change your mind? The actual situation was a player
revoking on the first trick of the suit, so declarer perhaps wanted to take advantage of the penalty card.
Of course it could be just changing his mind, or finding out the suit is breaking badly.
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

Ed Reppert | 14 Jan 10:31 2016
Picon

Giving UI to oneself

Recently on bridgewinners it has been suggested that a player who reached into his bidding box and started
to pull out some (unidentified) bidding cards, but did not get them fully out of the box when he was told he
was not the dealer and put the back, gave UI not only to his partner, but to himself. This theory is based on
Law 16A1, which does not seem to allow that the fact that one has passed UI to partner is not among the list of
things that are AI, and Law 16A3, which says whatever’s not in that list (or in 16A2, which again this
isn’t) cannot be used as the basis for a call or play.

This seems to me to be just the kind of “angels dancing on a pinhead” question that this forum loves to
debate, so I ask for your comments on this principle.

I note that if the principle is valid, it is valid for *all* situations in which a player passes UI to his
partner, and probably a number of other situations as well.

The actual auction, for those who insist, was, East dealer and North starting to make a bid (but not actually
making one, ACBL rules), East bids 2 diamonds (weak two), South overcalls 2 hearts on 13 HCP and a five card
heart suit, West passes, and North, who has a 4=3=2=4 13 count including king doubleton of clubs, bids a
mere(!) 3 hearts. Now the argument goes that South didn’t use UI because he has a legitimate, if minimum,
overcall, but *North* used UI — the UI apparently being that North knows that South knows that North has
an opening hand and therefore may have stretched to overcall.

Frankly, my reaction to all this is “you have *got* to be kidding,” but apparently they’re not.

The BW thread is here: http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/atr-assess-this-ruling/

Auction repeated for clarity: 2D-2H-P-3H-all pass.
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Jeff Easterson | 7 Jan 09:18 2016
Picon
Picon

membership in blml

I had (once again) an email stating that I had been "unsubscribed" from 
the blml mailing list.  This seems to happen about twice a year.  Is 
there any way it can be stopped?  What is causing these emails?  I, of 
course, wish to remain on the list and would appreciate it if you could 
manage to stop "unsubscribing" me.
Is there anything I can do to help?  Is it caused by some problem caused 
by my providers?  I get emails through aol and gmx and there have been 
problems with aol in the past.  Perhaps it would be better to use the 
gmx email address for the list.

My email addresses are:

Jeff.Easterson <at> gmx.de

and JffEstrsn <at> aol.com

I'd be thankful for any help, it is aggravating to keep getting emails 
saying that I have been "unsubscribed".

Ciao,  Jeff Easterson

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
Blml <at> rtflb.org
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

Gmane