BBO Discussion Forums: Fielding -- - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Fielding -- I don't get it

#1 User is offline   Flem72 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 505
  • Joined: 2011-March-04

Posted 2011-December-05, 18:07

Will someone explain to me when a violation of the rule against fielding occurs?

My example, against an ACBL big regional Bracket II or III pair:

P-1D-1N-P
2H*-P-2S-P
3H**-P-P-P

* = announced "transfer"
** = delay, hitch in tempo nothing approaching histrionics

Duummy comes down with

AKJx
xx
AQxx
Qxx

Upon inquiry, responder apparently forgot that they were playing transfers in this position, but O was clear that they were playing them. Based on O's understanding, R's sequence was an inv 5-5 in the majors. ATD was on first name basis with the responder; ruling was to the effect of 'as long as he didn't outwardly tip off the goof, no problem.' Isn't this wrong?

Regards and Happy Trails,

Scott Needham
Boulder, Colorado, USA
0

#2 User is offline   billw55 

  • enigmatic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,757
  • Joined: 2009-July-31
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-05, 18:21

Looks like an easy one to me. Overcaller has used UI to choose pass. So yes, it is wrong, and deserves an adjusted score and lecture.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#3 User is offline   wyman 

  • Redoubling with gusto
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,712
  • Joined: 2009-October-19
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV
  • Interests:Math, Bridge, Beer. Often at the same time.

Posted 2011-December-05, 18:28

If advancer bids 3H in tempo, there's no problem. Overcaller is allowed to wake up to the fact that they are not playing transfers. If there's a BIT by advancer that wakes up overcaller, then this should be adjusted, likely to 4Sx.

Additionally there's the problem of what overcaller's 2S means to advancer, who has UI from the announcement of the transfer.

Looks like a normal UI case though to me.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg

"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
0

#4 User is offline   billw55 

  • enigmatic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,757
  • Joined: 2009-July-31
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-05, 18:37

View Postwyman, on 2011-December-05, 18:28, said:

... Overcaller is allowed to wake up to the fact that they are not playing transfers.


View PostFlem72, on 2011-December-05, 18:07, said:

... O was clear that they were playing them. Based on O's understanding, R's sequence was an inv 5-5 in the majors.

The facts seem to leave little room for this particular bit of enlightenment by overcaller. So clearly, IMO, that a PP warning is warranted, if this is an experienced player; and an actual PP, if this is a player with a known prior incident.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#5 User is offline   mrdct 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,448
  • Joined: 2003-October-27
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moama, NSW

Posted 2011-December-05, 19:54

The lack of a super-accept over 2 could be viewed as the overcaller already catering for partner not remembering that they were playing <T-word> and that may give him some licence to legally read the situation after the 3 bid, but as the OP confirmed that 3 was out of tempo this looks like a pretty clear UI case and an adjustment would be in order for which we will need to see the full hand.
Disclaimer: The above post may be a half-baked sarcastic rant intended to stimulate discussion and it does not necessarily coincide with my own views on this topic.
I bidding the suit below the suit I'm actually showing not to be described as a "transfer" for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the concept of a transfer
0

#6 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-05, 20:11

View PostFlem72, on 2011-December-05, 18:07, said:

Will someone explain to me when a violation of the rule against fielding occurs?

It's my understanding that "fielding" has to do with figuring out that your partner psyched, not that he misbid or forgot your agreements.
0

#7 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,765
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2011-December-05, 21:15

View PostBbradley62, on 2011-December-05, 20:11, said:

It's my understanding that "fielding" has to do with figuring out that your partner psyched, not that he misbid or forgot your agreements.


I don't see how there is a practical difference between a psyche and misbid or forget with regard to fielding. The difference is the intent of the bidder. The affect is that partner bid (or showed) something that they do not have in both cases. In both cases one can field the actual meaning rather than the meaning shown just by the bids in isolation.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#8 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,765
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2011-December-05, 21:27

1. Under normal circumstances the overcaller is free to bid whatever he likes provided that such bid (or call) is not based on an undisclosed partnership understanding.

2. A slow 3 may give unauthorized information.

3. However it is not clear to me from the opening post that the slow bid in this case by itself necessarily met the requirement of demonstrably suggesting pass which is what is required for the overcaller to be constrained from passing.

4. In these situations in experienced partnerships I am convinced often that what might not be suggested to me or another outside observer is plain to the partner.

5. I would be interested if this sort of mistake has ever happened before.

6. I would be interested if this auction has ever occurred before.

7. I would be interested if this auction has ever occurred before and overcaller passed and partner did in fact have both majors. Or indeed more generally if this player had ever suspected a misbid from partner and allowed for it and was wrong. A player who takes a legal flies at asystemic actions like the pass here (see 1 above) would be expected at times to guess horribly wrong.

I don't think you can rule anything is wrong here unless you get some answers to these questions. In particular the slow 3 in and of itself does not suggest to me that partner should pass. It could be that he has a marginal game try or game force or only four hearts and forgot to Stayman rather than he forgot to transfer.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#9 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,585
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-06, 00:27

I was thinking something similar to Cascade, that the hesitation doesn't necessarily suggest a system forget. However, if there's any reason for him to suspect this, such as history of similar mistakes or a recent system change, I think you have to treat the BIT as demonstrably suggesting it.

#10 User is offline   bluejak 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,686
  • Joined: 2007-August-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, Cats, Railways, Transport timetables

Posted 2011-December-06, 02:59

Forgetting the UI for a moment, if my partner bid this way pass would not occur to me. The problem is that a player who passes 3 may easily be doing so because his partner has forgotten before - and that is why the EBU and WBU take action against fielded misbids: they are based on a CPU.

But other authorities do not see it this way and allow what seems to me to be a breach of Law 40 without worrying.
David Stevenson

Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
0

#11 User is offline   wyman 

  • Redoubling with gusto
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,712
  • Joined: 2009-October-19
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV
  • Interests:Math, Bridge, Beer. Often at the same time.

Posted 2011-December-06, 08:03

Wait a sec.

This isn't a case of "partner was deciding between two calls, so you have logical alternatives to consider, one or more of which may be suggested by UI."

This is:

- overcaller botches system
- advancer creates a BIT during the auction period
- sometime before his call following the BIT, overcaller remembers that he has botched the system (evidently)

I thought in these cases it was near universal that a bidder cannot "wake-up" to his side's bidding misunderstanding after an irregularity such as a BIT unless it's clear from bridge knowledge that something funny is going on.

Add to that: overcaller never alerted the other side to the possibility that advancer may just have hearts. If all he said was "5-5 inv" and then passed, there's a problem.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg

"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
0

#12 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-06, 08:13

View PostFlem72, on 2011-December-05, 18:07, said:

Upon inquiry, responder apparently forgot that they were playing transfers in this position, but O was clear that they were playing them.

View Postwyman, on 2011-December-06, 08:03, said:

This is:
- overcaller botches system

I think we were told at the beginning that Responder botched, not Overcaller; Overcaller rescued Responder with his pass.
0

#13 User is offline   wyman 

  • Redoubling with gusto
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,712
  • Joined: 2009-October-19
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV
  • Interests:Math, Bridge, Beer. Often at the same time.

Posted 2011-December-06, 09:14

View PostBbradley62, on 2011-December-06, 08:13, said:

I think we were told at the beginning that Responder botched, not Overcaller; Overcaller rescued Responder with his pass.


Even worse. Thanks for the correction.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg

"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
0

#14 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,765
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2011-December-06, 14:02

View Postwyman, on 2011-December-06, 09:14, said:

Even worse. Thanks for the correction.


It maybe worse. It may be no infraction at all.

Firstly the laws allow the player to pass. A play may make any call ...

On the other hand the pass may be based on a concealed partnership agreement. The 'any call' must not be based on an undisclosed partnership agreement.

It is hard for us to tell from one instance whether or not this pass is reasonable. Not reasonable as a bridge decision it clearly is not given the information conveyed superficially by the auction but reasonable from a lawful point of view. I have played against and (sadly for me) with players who might pass unsuccessfully on an auction like this. The difference is that they usually end in a poor contract. However occasionally their partner has also done something weird and they are not damaged by their poor choice.

For an adverse ruling against the pass the director needs to establish that there is an undisclosed partnership understanding or establish that there was unauthorized information that could demonstrably have suggested pass over the more normal looking 3. Absent the establishment of either of those two facts the laws clearly allow a player to make an otherwise inferior bid even when it happens to work out.

There is no evidence in the opening post that the players have an undisclosed partnership understanding.
There is no evidence in the opening post that there was any unauthorized information that demonstrably suggested pass.

This evidence may exist it needs to be investigated before lynching ("even worse") the players.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#15 User is offline   axman 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 2009-July-29
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-06, 20:40

View PostCascade, on 2011-December-06, 14:02, said:



There is no evidence in the opening post that there was any unauthorized information that demonstrably suggested pass.

This evidence may exist it needs to be investigated before lynching ("even worse") the players.


I am curious as to what inference might be drawn when responder hitched prior to rebidding 3H?

I would believe that 3H ought to promise invitational honors, 5+S, 4+H shape with a NT problem..

And under those conditions, I can believe that such a hitch could give the impetus to prefer a poor 4-2 heart contract to a magnificent 5-4 spade contract at the same level.
0

#16 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,585
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-08, 20:02

Did the TD ask O why he passed 3? If their agreement was that this shows 5-5 majors, he has an obvious preference for . While the Laws allow players to bid as they wish if there's no CPU and it's not demonstrably suggested by UI, it seems like a player would have a hard time justifying this pass.

#17 User is offline   Trinidad 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,531
  • Joined: 2005-October-09
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 2011-December-09, 03:53

View Postbarmar, on 2011-December-08, 20:02, said:

Did the TD ask O why he passed 3? If their agreement was that this shows 5-5 majors, he has an obvious preference for . While the Laws allow players to bid as they wish if there's no CPU and it's not demonstrably suggested by UI, it seems like a player would have a hard time justifying this pass.

I suppose a TD is not allowed to ask: "What is it you don't know? Don't you know how to play bridge or don't you know how to play bridge by the rules?" ;)

Rik
I want my opponents to leave my table with a smile on their face and without matchpoints on their score card - in that order.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
0

#18 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,585
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-09, 13:54

There's always the possibility that he'll answer honestly "The last time my partner bid like this, it was because he forgot about transfers, so I guessed that's what he was doing." I'll bet plenty of players are ignorant enough of the rules that they wouldn't realize that they're incriminating themselves.

On the other hand, he could answer: "Since my hearts are short and spades are long, I guessed that it's more likely partner forgot about transfers than that we have a 9-card fit in spades." I think I'd have to accept this explanation.

#19 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2011-December-09, 16:58

View Postbarmar, on 2011-December-09, 13:54, said:

There's always the possibility that he'll answer honestly "The last time my partner bid like this, it was because he forgot about transfers, so I guessed that's what he was doing." I'll bet plenty of players are ignorant enough of the rules that they wouldn't realize that they're incriminating themselves.

Maybe there are even some players who would tell the truth knowing that it was incriminating?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#20 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2011-December-10, 06:12

View Postgnasher, on 2011-December-09, 16:58, said:

Maybe there are even some players who would tell the truth knowing that it was incriminating?


So they would cheat and then decide to tell on themselves? Seems kind of unlikely.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

4 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users