[Trinidad]

Just my 2 cents at a STOP regulation that is entirely different. IMO it should be something like:

Whenever you are in a situation where you could (perhaps with another hand) have a bidding problem, you act as if you have such a bidding problem: You ask questions about alerted bids, you act as if you are thinking what to do and then you make your bid.

This means, as an illustration:

---

No pauses after the jumps. After the jump to 3♠, you won't be interested in bidding if you weren't interested earlier. After the jump to 6♠, you don't need a pause either. You could see a potential 6♠ coming long before, so you have already decided if you are going to double for a lead. But, instead:
- A short pause (to fake that you need) to decide whether to overcall after 1♠
- A question after 2♣, and maybe a short pause (to fake that you need) to decide whether to double 2♣ or overcall

To me, it is important that players understand the reason behind the rule. After that you can make the rule as general as possible, rather than limit it to jump bids.

Rik

[barmar]

That would certainly be ideal, but it would be a nightmare to enforce. "a situation where you could have a bidding problem" is an incredibly vague specification.

Current STOP card rules don't address all the tempo issues, they just deal with a small subset that are easy to identify.

[gwnn]

At the risk of asking a pointless question on a small detail, what's up with this 'bid upside down first' rule? Am I supposed to keep my bidding cards upside down for, say, 0.5 seconds, then assume that my LHO will be able to measure the 10 seconds himself, or am I supposed to keep some of them upside down for 10 seconds (presumably not the top card )? Is this the rule in any other country? I vaguely remember seeing this a few times but I've never identified it as a skip bid procedure.

[Trinidad]

gwnn, on 2012-June-08, 09:33, said:

At the risk of asking a pointless question on a small detail, what's up with this 'bid upside down first' rule? Am I supposed to keep my bidding cards upside down for, say, 0.5 seconds, then assume that my LHO will be able to measure the 10 seconds himself, or am I supposed to keep some of them upside down for 10 seconds (presumably not the top card )? Is this the rule in any other country? I vaguely remember seeing this a few times but I've never identified it as a skip bid procedure.

I don't know where it came from. (Though I am Dutch, I learned to play bridge when I lived in the USA.)

The Dutch procedure is:
Show STOP card.
Make bid.
Remove STOP card.
LHO waits 10 seconds before calling.

(That means that the bidder doesn't control the tempo by leaving the STOP card out.)

If there is no STOP card, the procedure is:
Take your bid out of the bidding box and put it upside down on the table (for about a second so everyone sees that there will be a skip bid).
Make your bid by turning the bidding cards right side up.
LHO waits 10 seconds before calling.

This procedure has the advantage that nothing is said (no intonation issues, no UI to other tables). But I just think it looks silly.

As an aside, if you have a STOP rule, in my opinion it should be the skip bidder who controls the tempo. That is obviously impossible if he has to hold his bidding cards upside down. I think it is much more important that the skip bidder controls the tempo then that there is a rule for a missing STOP card. I think the rule for a missing STOP card should be that you call the TD to get you a STOP card.

Rik

[Trinidad]

barmar, on 2012-June-08, 09:28, said:

That would certainly be ideal, but it would be a nightmare to enforce. "a situation where you could have a bidding problem" is an incredibly vague specification.

Current STOP card rules don't address all the tempo issues, they just deal with a small subset that are easy to identify.

But in doing so, they create a false sense of security ("we have a rule") when only the small subset is covered. What are people supposed to do in those situations that are not covered by the STOP card? There is no rule for those. Meanwhile, the makers of regulations are:

i) happy that they have a STOP regulation
ii) shrugging their shoulders about the hard-to-identify situations, "since it is impossible to make a rule for those".

The latter is definitely not true, since I just stated a rule for that. I admit that it may be difficult to enforce. But it clearly states a goal of how it should be.

It doesn't really help if everybody has something like this in mind, when it isn't written specifically in a regulation (or propriety). If nobody speaks up and actually says out loud where we want to go, then nobody will start walking.

Rik

[gnasher]

Trinidad, on 2012-June-08, 06:11, said:

Just my 2 cents at a STOP regulation that is entirely different. IMO it should be something like:

Whenever you are in a situation where you could (perhaps with another hand) have a bidding problem, you act as if you have such a bidding problem: You ask questions about alerted bids, you act as if you are thinking what to do and then you make your bid.

This rule would require intelligence and understanding from the players. I think that rules it out. Too many bridge players - even very good players - are too stupid or too obstinate to understand a rule of that type.

You could get quite close by writing rules like:
"If the past five calls include at least one action by each side ..."
"After an alert on the first or second round of the auction ..."
"After a jump on the first round of the auction ..."

Also, if you are going to require players to ask about all first-round alerted calls, it would be simpler just to make the other side announce them instead.

As usual, screens would solve most of these problems.

[antonylee]

My 2 eurocents with the French (FFB) regulations (which are also the ones I was taught :-)):

Before making a skip bid (including an opening bid), the player must put the Stop card face up on the table.
After a skip bid has been made, LHO must pause for 5 to 10 seconds, regardless of whether the Stop card has been used and regardless of whether it has been withdrawn.
Not using a Stop card may result in loss of rights for a player whose LHO did not pause after a skip bid.
Stop is not a call. Using a Stop card out of turn, or passing or making any non-skip call after using a Stop card, does not constitute a call out of rotation, or a change of call. However, such actions can transmit UI and Law 16 may apply.

[barmar]

The French regulation seems similar to ACBL, which most consider flawed. The main flaw in both is the requirement to pause regardless of whether the Stop card is used (which is why many misunderstand it to say that using the Stop card is optional).

I do like the last part (starting at "Stop is not a call"), which clarifies some things that occasionally cause confusion.

[aguahombre]

barmar, on 2012-June-12, 09:39, said:

The French regulation seems similar to ACBL, which most consider flawed. The main flaw in both is the requirement to pause regardless of whether the Stop card is used...

While I agree with the rest of your post (snipped), I am curious about this part. Why is a requirement to pause after righty's skip bid (regardless of whether he flags it) a flaw?

[barmar]

aguahombre, on 2012-June-12, 10:21, said:

While I agree with the rest of your post (snipped), I am curious about this part. Why is a requirement to pause after righty's skip bid (regardless of whether he flags it) a flaw?

The requirement to skip isn't the flaw, it's the fact that the use of the card doesn't affect the requirement. As others have said earlier in the thread, what's the point of the card then?

And then, even though LHO is required to pause, the bidder may lose rights if he fails to use the Stop card. So first it says that using the Stop card doesn't matter, then it says it does. Apparently the point of the card is just to maintain your rights if LHO fails to pause, not to actually enforce the pause.

[Trinidad]

gnasher, on 2012-June-09, 02:39, said:

This rule would require intelligence and understanding from the players. I think that rules it out. Too many bridge players - even very good players - are too stupid or too obstinate to understand a rule of that type.

You could get quite close by writing rules like:
"If the past five calls include at least one action by each side ..."
"After an alert on the first or second round of the auction ..."
"After a jump on the first round of the auction ..."

Also, if you are going to require players to ask about all first-round alerted calls, it would be simpler just to make the other side announce them instead.

As usual, screens would solve most of these problems.

I couldn't disagree with you more (except for the last sentence).

Bridge players want to be seen as intelligent people, not as folks who have to learn detailed rules by heart. (Remember, these are rules ofr players, not for TDs.) And there is a big problem with detailed rules: Invariably somebody will find a detail that wasn't covered. Then the detailed rule doesn't work until it is fixed, resulting in an even more detailed rule.

One-liners ("If you might need to think, act as if you think.") are easy to understand. It requires some training to actually follow that rule, but it doesn't require much to understand it. Detailed rules, OTOH, lead to not seeing the forest through the trees. On top of that, it is easy to forget a few details.

Second, I did not mean to require anybody to ask about all first-round calls. I am requiring that they act as if they have a bidding problem. So, they need to know what they do if they have a bidding problem. Most people who have a bidding problem would like to know what the auction means. Sometimes they already know; sometimes they look on the CC; sometimes they ask. My point is that if you don't have a bidding problem, you should fake one. This means that sometimes you will look on the CC; sometimes you will ask and sometimes you will already know what the auction means. So, I merely gave an example of what people do when they have a bidding problem. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

If you can't possibly know the meaning of the auction and pass after counting to 10, you have wasted 10 seconds of everybody's life: It is still 100% obvious that you are not close to getting into the auction.

And about screens: I love playing with screens. For me the only drawback is that the game takes more time. But I doubt that players at my local club would like to play their regular club night with screens. Therefore, we will need something like a STOP regulation.

Rik

[Mbodell]

barmar, on 2012-June-12, 12:07, said:

The requirement to skip isn't the flaw, it's the fact that the use of the card doesn't affect the requirement. As others have said earlier in the thread, what's the point of the card then?

And then, even though LHO is required to pause, the bidder may lose rights if he fails to use the Stop card. So first it says that using the Stop card doesn't matter, then it says it does. Apparently the point of the card is just to maintain your rights if LHO fails to pause, not to actually enforce the pause.

In practice, you don't really lose your rights though. I've only ever once heard a director try to make that ruling. Usually the only thing people care about is do you always/never use the card and what was everyone's tempo compared to normal.

[aguahombre]

Mbodell, on 2012-June-12, 23:05, said:

In practice, you don't really lose your rights though. I've only ever once heard a director try to make that ruling. Usually the only thing people care about is do you always/never use the card and what was everyone's tempo compared to normal.

Right, for over here. It must be a compelling issue in EBU, however, since on several threads the question has been asked by British posters when other issues were being debated regarding tempo...going off-topic to my thinking, but important to them.

[gnasher]

Trinidad, on 2012-June-12, 15:55, said:

My point is that if you don't have a bidding problem, you should fake one. This means that sometimes you will look on the CC; sometimes you will ask and sometimes you will already know what the auction means. So, I merely gave an example of what people do when they have a bidding problem. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

No, it was completely clear, and if the world were populated by people like you and me I would completely agree with your proposal.

But it's not. The world is full of people who don't even understand the purpose of the current Stop-bid regulations. As you say:

Quote

If you can't possibly know the meaning of the auction and pass after counting to 10, you have wasted 10 seconds of everybody's life: It is still 100% obvious that you are not close to getting into the auction.

People do this all the time - they see a Stop card so they pause for 10 seconds, but they don't ask any questions, and everyone knows that they weren't thinking. Most of them have no idea that by doing this they are rendering the entire procedure pointless. How are you going to get these people to understand and follow your proposed rule? I'm sorry to say this, but many bridge players, even good players, are hopeless at understanding rules or the rationale for them.

[RMB1]

gnasher, on 2012-June-13, 02:29, said:

..., but many bridge players, even good players, are hopeless at understanding rules or the rationale for them.

Many players, and many who to aspire to direct, fail to realise there is rationale for the rules (= laws and regulations).

[blackshoe]

In some cases they don't just fail to realize, they willfully refuse to believe it.

[Bbradley62]

RMB1, on 2012-June-13, 03:53, said:

Many players, and many who to aspire to direct, fail to realise there is rationale for the rules (= laws and regulations).

I guess those people didn't spend as much time in Catholic schools as some of the rest of us... It doesn't matter whether there is a rationale for the rules; if there are rules, you follow the rules or you get punished.

[barmar]

Trinidad, on 2012-June-12, 15:55, said:

And about screens: I love playing with screens. For me the only drawback is that the game takes more time. But I doubt that players at my local club would like to play their regular club night with screens. Therefore, we will need something like a STOP regulation.

I don't think saying that screens would solve the problem was meant as a serious suggestion to use screens so liberally. Sometimes the solution is worse than the problem, or cost-prohibitive, or is otherwise infeasible.

[paua]

gwnn, on 2012-June-05, 02:42, said:

What do you think is the best skip bid regulation if you wanted to write one?

The Dutch one goes something like this:
1. Any opening bid on the 2 level or higher, or any skip bid, must be accompanied by a warning, described here:
a) With bidding boxes, you need to lay down the stop card so as both opponents can see it. If the stop card is missing, you should place your bid upside down (?!) and then turn them right side up.
b) Without bidding boxes, you should verbally announce the bid by saying 'stop!'.
2. After any bid described by 1., the next player should wait about 10 seconds before making his or her call.
3. None of this applies to screens.

This seems slightly weird to me - what does 2. say? I can read it in two different ways: either that you need to wait 10 seconds after any jump bid/2+ level opening bid (i.e. described by the first line), or that you need to wait 10 seconds after any jump bid/2+ opening bid if RHO made a proper warning. Furthermore, what's up with bidding upside down and when are you supposed to turn over the bidding cards? And what's the point of the stop card if you are not going to remove it? I don't get it.

What happened in this case was that my LHO just said 'stop' and made his jump overcall and my partner passed almost instantly. The director was called and he ruled that regardless of the use of the stop card, you always must wait 10 seconds. I asked him what he's basing this on because according to me this is written nowhere. He showed me this rule and my Dutch wasn't good enough to decipher the regulation on the spot and just believed him (apparently, he believes rule #2 means that the description of #1 refers just to the jump bid/2+ level opening part and not the stop card - in this case why use the stop card at all? surely we all can see that it is a jump overcall no?). For people who do not trust my translation above, this is the original text:

Spoiler

Artikel 10
Stopregel
1. Tenzij het RB anders voorschrijft, moet een openingsbod van 2 of hoger,
alsmede ieder sprongbod worden voorafgegaan door een waarschuwing als
volgt:
a) als gebruik gemaakt wordt van bidding boxes door de stopkaart voor beide
tegenstanders zichtbaar op tafel te leggen; als de stopkaart ontbreekt, dient
de uitgenomen stapel biedkaarten eerst ondersteboven op tafel te worden
gelegd, en vervolgens te worden omgedraaid;
b) als geen bidding boxes worden gebruikt: door het bod te laten voorafgaan
door het woord 'stop'.
2. Na een bod als in lid 1 omschreven is de volgende speler verplicht ca 10
seconden te wachten voor hij een bieding doet. Elke bieding binnen deze periode
kan als een ongeoorloofde inlichting worden aangemerkt.
3. Dit artikel is niet van toepassing bij wedstrijden waarbij tafelschermen worden
gebruikt.

Simple solution : If a player wishes to protect themselves then they should carry their own STOP card and display it on the table before play begins. Firstly, this announces to the opps that they use a STOP card, and therefore will use it for ALL jumps, even 1NT-3NT. Not just when they feel like it.
[We use bidding pads, so I like the method of holding the card over LHO's bidding space for 10 seconds. LHO doesn't have to do the counting now, just think about the bidding.]

Secondly, when RHO jumps (or makes a non-jump bid that is unexpected), a player can play the STOP card on themself to indicate that they consider this a situation worthy of a pause. LHO can count and remove the card.

Any players who do not carry a STOP card and follow this procedure have no protection against UI, similar to the idea that any player that does not have a system card has no protection against misinformation.

But I know there will be a lot of reluctance at club level.