[broze]

MickyB, on 2013-April-24, 10:55, said:

Yes, this. Say oppo are playing standard leads, except they don't treat the ten as an honour. If they've circled the 2nd highest card in each Txx(x)(x) combination, it takes about one second to understand their methods. If they've moved the underlines, I need to check every combination listed to see if the card marked is different from standard.

Yeah - I see what you mean. I had got rid of the underlines altogether and just circled the leads we use but I can see how they might be helpful if you are familiar with the EBU card. Perhaps an improvement would be to use a format like the WBF CC in which you record what holdings you lead certain cards from, rather than the other way around.

To return to the OP; in terms of club bridge it greatly annoys me when the opponents' procedural misdemeanours that I cba to call the director over are never corrected, not even when the perpetrators are sitting at the director's table!

One amusing example I've seen is the opening leader looking at her hand, asking parter "Any questions?" and then selecting a lead, placing it face down, and then turning it over. Here a facepalm is perhaps more appropriate than a director call.

[mycroft]

I'm wonderfully passive-aggressive when I need to be (and somewhat less wonderfully when I shouldn't - I'm working on that).

The first case, I would simply remind the player every time that he should close his scorecard, until he started doing it by default. Were I also a TD, I'd also check (when I'm TDing, not when I'm playing) frequently that he is doing that by default at other tables besides mine (of course, as a TD, I'm allowed to give my "requests" teeth I can't as a player). Going back to "at the table", were he to object to doing this, I would call the TD. Every time he objected. Let the TD explain that "we're not accusing you of using your scorecard as an aid to play, but since someone wanting that aid would do what you're doing, you can't do it either."

Eventually it becomes less annoying to follow the Law than it is to be lazy (assuming that's what it is; if it turns out that he *was* using it as an aid to play...)

The "little thing that they do" that gets me is when dummy comes down (or at end of hand, if they're defending), she tells partner "You know that that auction means X" - as opposed to, you know, telling *us* about the MI?

[iviehoff]

What I hate is when a player puts out dummy so that the visible pips are at the bottom of the card and upside down from declarer's point of view. When I ask them to rectify it, as I always do, since what they have done is not the legal way of displaying dummy, and it distracts me, first they usually pretend they don't know what I'm talking about. But I don't believe they can be unaware that what they have done is different from common practice - these are usually players who have been playing for many years. Their first attempt to rectify is usually by put by unfanning the cards in each suit into a little packet and smearing it in the opposite direction, only to discover this doesn't work either. I'm sure they must know enough about handling cards after all these years to know this wasn't going to work, and it was just a ruse to pretend they can't work out how it can possibly be achieved. Or if they do own up to realising that they do know you have to reverse the order of the cards in each suit, they'll claim it is far too much work. Has no one ever asked them to put it right before, or is this just a game of cussedness that they enjoy playing?

[blackshoe]

The first time I heard a declarer say "play", I thought he meant "play anything", so I designated a card from dummy. You can imagine what happened next.

I designate cards from dummy in the manner specified by Law 46A. I find that eventually my partners start doing the same thing. Opponents, however, do not.

[barmar]

iviehoff, on 2013-April-24, 13:56, said:

What I hate is when a player puts out dummy so that the visible pips are at the bottom of the card and upside down from declarer's point of view. When I ask them to rectify it, as I always do, since what they have done is not the legal way of displaying dummy, and it distracts me, first they usually pretend they don't know what I'm talking about. But I don't believe they can be unaware that what they have done is different from common practice - these are usually players who have been playing for many years. Their first attempt to rectify is usually by put by unfanning the cards in each suit into a little packet and smearing it in the opposite direction, only to discover this doesn't work either. I'm sure they must know enough about handling cards after all these years to know this wasn't going to work, and it was just a ruse to pretend they can't work out how it can possibly be achieved. Or if they do own up to realising that they do know you have to reverse the order of the cards in each suit, they'll claim it is far too much work. Has no one ever asked them to put it right before, or is this just a game of cussedness that they enjoy playing?

I think this comes from sorting their hands in the opposite order than most (I hope you agree that this is their right -- nothing dicates the order of cards in an unexposed hand), so the natural way to lay them down results in this. Other players who sort their hands this way, but want to lay them down properly, do a different annoying thing: "dealing" the cards to dummy one card at a time.

[mycroft]

Ah well, if we're going there - how about the ones that either drop them short-edge-overlap or fan them out in little flowers? Or as KJT36?

[Vampyr]

iviehoff, on 2013-April-24, 13:56, said:

What I hate is when a player puts out dummy so that the visible pips are at the bottom of the card and upside down from declarer's point of view. When I ask them to rectify it, as I always do, since what they have done is not the legal way of displaying dummy,

Where do you get the idea that this is illegal?

[WellSpyder]

barmar, on 2013-April-25, 08:59, said:

I think this comes from sorting their hands in the opposite order than most (I hope you agree that this is their right -- nothing dicates the order of cards in an unexposed hand), so the natural way to lay them down results in this. Other players who sort their hands this way, but want to lay them down properly, do a different annoying thing: "dealing" the cards to dummy one card at a time.

Oh dear! Is this annoying? I rather think I might do this. How else should I get them looking right in the dummy?

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on 2013-April-25, 10:18, said:

Where do you get the idea that this is illegal?

If you call not doing what the rules say to do illegal, then 41D will suffice. Some think that is just a suggestion.

IMO, when it says "this is how it is done", they means it should be done that way rather than just a casual observation of how people often do it.

[ggwhiz]

We have a good player who as declarer will often put his cards back in the board after seeing the opening lead and say "making 5".

Do I let it slide? Not on your life, I double dummy the defence with his hand exposed so he doesn't do it against me anymore.

I don't let other things slide unless it's against personable rookies and as a result usually only deal with a single occurence.

[Vampyr]

WellSpyder, on 2013-April-25, 10:26, said:

Oh dear! Is this annoying? I rather think I might do this. How else should I get them looking right in the dummy?

I think that I put them down one at a time too, but I am guessing that what barmar is calling annoying is when this is done pretentiously and slowly, with much snapping of the cards.

[ahydra]

I like to claim a lot (mainly because I can be quite a slow player at times). However there are a couple of pairs in my club who don't like declarer claiming and they always ask to "play it out". Not wanting to make a fuss about it I play it out with my hand exposed, or simply state "I would claim, but you don't like it, so I'll play on" at the point when I would have claimed (probably unnecessary).

I figure surely it's better if they learn to adjudicate and accept/reject claims? Perhaps I should just call the TD and get them to explain how the claim works?

ahydra

[chrism]

That is at least better than the "discovery claim", where declarer claims without a line, and when a defender objects or asks for clarification, says "well, maybe we had better just play it out" having magically inferred the location of a missing honor, existence of the 13th trump, etc.

[FrancesHinden]

WellSpyder, on 2013-April-25, 10:26, said:

Oh dear! Is this annoying? I rather think I might do this. How else should I get them looking right in the dummy?

There's usually plenty of time to sort your hand properly before putting it down between the third pass and the opening lead being faced.
I don't sort my hand at all (other than by suit) during the auction.

[blackshoe]

Vampyr, on 2013-April-25, 10:18, said:

Where do you get the idea that this is illegal?

Probably Law 41D. However, even if doing it is not illegal under that law, it's illegal under 74A2.

[iviehoff]

ggwhiz, on 2013-April-25, 10:31, said:

We have a good player who as declarer will often put his cards back in the board after seeing the opening lead and say "making 5".

Do I let it slide? Not on your life, I double dummy the defence with his hand exposed so he doesn't do it against me anymore.

That's not your job, except to the extent that you feel it necessary to educate the director. Simply call the director and say you don't accede to the claim. Director must now adjudicate the claim. If the director is competent, that will suffice to educate the player not to do it again.

[iviehoff]

chrism, on 2013-April-25, 13:28, said:

That is at least better than the "discovery claim", where declarer claims without a line, and when a defender objects or asks for clarification, says "well, maybe we had better just play it out" having magically inferred the location of a missing honor, existence of the 13th trump, etc.

Again, you just call the director at this point and have the claim adjudicated. A director of fairly basic competence will not allow the declarer to take into account a trump he did not mention at the time of the claim, nor the location of a missing honour. Those ones are specifically mentioned in the rules, and in general I find weaker directors even harsher against dodgy claims than better ones.

[blackshoe]

ahydra, on 2013-April-25, 11:04, said:

I like to claim a lot (mainly because I can be quite a slow player at times). However there are a couple of pairs in my club who don't like declarer claiming and they always ask to "play it out". Not wanting to make a fuss about it I play it out with my hand exposed, or simply state "I would claim, but you don't like it, so I'll play on" at the point when I would have claimed (probably unnecessary).

I figure surely it's better if they learn to adjudicate and accept/reject claims? Perhaps I should just call the TD and get them to explain how the claim works?

If you claim and they ask to play it out, you have no choice but to call the director. Be kind: an instant stentorian "Director!" will probably intimidate these poor folks. Try "I can't legally do that; we'll need the director to sort it out". If you recognize the futility of claiming against them, my advice would be don't claim — you probably won't save any time. As for education, as you imply that's the TD's job. Besides, it sounds like no matter how much education these opponents receive, they're never going to get it.

[nige1]

blackshoe, on 2013-April-26, 07:25, said:

If you claim and they ask to play it out, you have no choice but to call the director. Be kind: an instant stentorian "Director!" will probably intimidate these poor folks. Try "I can't legally do that; we'll need the director to sort it out". If you recognize the futility of claiming against them, my advice would be don't claim — you probably won't save any time. As for education, as you imply that's the TD's job. Besides, it sounds like no matter how much education these opponents receive, they're never going to get it.

Under current law, is declarer allowed to say "I'm not claiming. But with your permission, I'm going to play the rest of the tricks with my cards face-up"? If so, that might speed up the game without harassing such defenders.

[aguahombre]

nige1, on 2013-April-26, 07:56, said:

Under current law, is declarer allowed to say "I'm not claiming. But with your permission, I'm going to play the rest of the tricks with my cards face-up." If so, that might speed up the game without harassing such defenders.

Didn't we do this number before in the thread where Declarer showed a defender his cards?