Help
The bbo allows for reference to the auction at all times during the play of the deal. Other bridge sites too do so. Is it in accordance with the laws? I believe that this restating of auction can't be requested in face-to-face bridge after play to first trick. Should not the bbo block the auction after play to the first trick, or am i missing something?
Page 1 of 1
Display of auction
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,277
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-June-11, 14:52
Not a new complaint of course and no you are not missing much, except that after play to the first trick we should still be informed as to what the contract is and whether, but not by whom, it was doubled or redoubled.
But BBO infringes many laws, with and without reason, often more important laws than this one.
But BBO infringes many laws, with and without reason, often more important laws than this one.
#3
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 194
- Joined: 2021-June-19
Posted 2023-June-11, 21:50
Thanks for the answer, but i wonder why online sites -not just bbo- do this. I am afraid there are a few others like me slipping into the bad habit of not taking pains to remember the auction.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,277
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-June-12, 04:44
Many have a bad habit of not being able to remember the auction even without playing online 
Not all online sites fail to follow this law, but unfortunately there is no WBF online law and so the sites often feel free to make their own rules when necessary - and sometimes when not. Sometimes they are just being lazy, sometimes they think their customers would prefer things their way.
FWIW I would be comfortable with a Law that allowed the auction to remain visible during play. I doubt the lawmakers took an ideological position that remembering the auction is an inherent part of bridge, probably they just reasoned that one opportunity to have the auction restated verbally was more than enough. We don't have that problem in an electronic environment.
Not all online sites fail to follow this law, but unfortunately there is no WBF online law and so the sites often feel free to make their own rules when necessary - and sometimes when not. Sometimes they are just being lazy, sometimes they think their customers would prefer things their way.
FWIW I would be comfortable with a Law that allowed the auction to remain visible during play. I doubt the lawmakers took an ideological position that remembering the auction is an inherent part of bridge, probably they just reasoned that one opportunity to have the auction restated verbally was more than enough. We don't have that problem in an electronic environment.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,972
- Joined: 2018-July-04
- Gender:Male
- Location:Australia
Posted 2023-June-13, 17:36
I figure online BRidge is different because people could be sitting with a pencil and paper or more sophisticated technology - so what happens at an online table doesn't matter - I'm more a social Bridge player anyway
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,277
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-June-14, 14:58
thepossum, on 2023-June-13, 17:36, said:
I figure online BRidge is different because people could be sitting with a pencil and paper or more sophisticated technology - so what happens at an online table doesn't matter
I may be naive, but I don't agree at all. I figure online bridge is different because it does not have many of the limitations of f2f, and it makes sense to take advantage of this and simplify laws that are just trying to resolve problems that no longer exist. People sitting with a pencil and paper or more sophisticated technology are ch**ting, just like the people at the club gleefully exploiting partner's tempo and mannerisms or intentionally overhearing scores and boards from the next table. Both matter, even if only a minority will pull this stuff.
(It's only a short matter of time until people will be able to get timely advice from an expert robot, as in Chess, but let's deal with the problems we already have first).
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,972
- Joined: 2018-July-04
- Gender:Male
- Location:Australia
Posted 2023-June-14, 21:54
pescetom, on 2023-June-14, 14:58, said:
I may be naive, but I don't agree at all. I figure online bridge is different because it does not have many of the limitations of f2f, and it makes sense to take advantage of this and simplify laws that are just trying to resolve problems that no longer exist. People sitting with a pencil and paper or more sophisticated technology are ch**ting, just like the people at the club gleefully exploiting partner's tempo and mannerisms or intentionally overhearing scores and boards from the next table. Both matter, even if only a minority will pull this stuff.
(It's only a short matter of time until people will be able to get timely advice from an expert robot, as in Chess, but let's deal with the problems we already have first).
(It's only a short matter of time until people will be able to get timely advice from an expert robot, as in Chess, but let's deal with the problems we already have first).
The point I am trying to make is why worry about the auction being available through a hand - also given the apparent (to me) huge increase in complexity in bidding systems these days too
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,277
- Joined: 2014-February-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Italy
Posted 2023-June-16, 17:11
thepossum, on 2023-June-14, 21:54, said:
The point I am trying to make is why worry about the auction being available through a hand - also given the apparent (to me) huge increase in complexity in bidding systems these days too
That I agree with, see previous comment. I don't think the lawmakers would or should worry about it remaining available when no verbal explanation is involved.
Page 1 of 1