[Trinidad]

ArtK78, on 2012-December-10, 07:57, said:

Trinidad, on 2012-December-10, 06:49, said:

ArtK78, on 2012-December-09, 11:22, said:

My regular partner doesn't keep a private score, so he doesn't have a cc unless I give him one.

That logic is of the same order as "I don't keep track of my gas mileage by writing down the odometer reading each time I fill up, so I don't need a driver's license."

Sorry. When I read this, my reaction was "Huh?"

Imagine my reaction when I read your post. "My partner doesn't have a cc (unless I give him one) because he doesn't keep a private score."

The fact that your partner doesn't keep a private score doesn't absolve him from his duty to have a cc.

The fact that I don't fill out odometer readings doesn't absolve me from my duty to have a driver's license.

No license, no driving. No cc, no bridge.

Rik

[jillybean]

mjj29, on 2012-December-10, 07:04, said:

I put my convention card in front of my opponents each round, and then put their convention card under my bidding box so that I can review it as necessary. I know I'm a crazy European, so I must be doing it wrong, rather than following the Proper American Way. It seems to work quite well though, and isn't difficult for anyone.

You would cause quite a stir over here! When can we have a game?

[barmar]

Trinidad, on 2012-December-10, 08:19, said:

The fact that your partner doesn't keep a private score doesn't absolve him from his duty to have a cc.

The fact that the CC is on the back side of the private score sheet is what suggests to him that they're related.

No one is claiming that he's correct, but that doesn't make your driving analogy reasonable.

[Trinidad]

barmar, on 2012-December-10, 09:38, said:

The fact that the CC is on the back side of the private score sheet is what suggests to him that they're related.

No one is claiming that he's correct, but that doesn't make your driving analogy reasonable.

The fact that the score is kept on the backside of the CC seems related, but it isn't. Mind you that we are talking about a regular partner. That means that they have played before and that Art has already filled out a zillion score cards (and CCs) in the past. As long as their CC doesn't change every session there will be lots of correct CCs around.

Art's partner can take the CC's home after each session then he will have CCs whether he likes to score or not.

Rik

[Bbradley62]

barmar, on 2012-December-10, 09:38, said:

No one is claiming that he's correct...

Art's "different strokes for different folks" certainly appears to be a claim that his partner's lack of a convention card is reasonable and should be considered acceptable.

[mycroft]

I (used to) put my (unfolded, proper) CC under my bidding box, with the box covering the leads section. When I defended, I put the contract in, then put it under my bidding box, with the box moved to cover the defensive bidding section. I don't see what the problem is.

(used to) because I now use a left-handed box almost all of the time...

[blackshoe]

mjj29, on 2012-December-10, 07:04, said:

I put my convention card in front of my opponents each round, and then put their convention card under my bidding box so that I can review it as necessary. I know I'm a crazy European, so I must be doing it wrong, rather than following the Proper American Way. It seems to work quite well though, and isn't difficult for anyone.

You do this in North America? And your opponents don't freak out? I would find that hard to believe, so I think what you're saying is that's what you do in your country. I can see that working out okay.

Hm. Ever done it when playing against a visiting North American?

[WellSpyder]

blackshoe, on 2012-December-10, 11:03, said:

Hm. Ever done it when playing against a visiting North American?

I have certainly done this against players used to playing in N America. And yes, it does tend to freak them out. But it is so normal in England, that I think they may as well learn a sensible way to handle these things....

[blackshoe]

Heh. I got back into bridge while in England (1990-1993) and learned the English way of dealing with system cards. Imagine my surprise at peoples' reactions (pretty much anything from "what are you doing?" to "get that thing out of my face!") when I got back to the States!

[ArtK78]

Bbradley62, on 2012-December-10, 10:03, said:

Art's "different strokes for different folks" certainly appears to be a claim that his partner's lack of a convention card is reasonable and should be considered acceptable.

Don't assume. I never said that my partner's actions were correct. I was merely stating a fact. With the exception of the one incident that I mentioned earlier, it has never made a difference.

[blackshoe]

What fact were you stating?

As to it never making a difference, are you absolutely certain?

[ArtK78]

blackshoe, on 2012-December-10, 13:27, said:

What fact were you stating?

As to it never making a difference, are you absolutely certain?

I was stating that my partner does not keep a private score and he almost never has a cc.

And I stated that it never made a difference to anyone at the table with the exception of the one incident at the District NAOP. It is not that great an inconvenience to your opps that you have only one cc filled out. I know that I have often had opponents who had only one cc filled out and no one ever thought to call the cops on them.

[Vampyr]

ArtK78, on 2012-December-10, 15:32, said:

I was stating that my partner does not keep a private score and he almost never has a cc.

And I stated that it never made a difference to anyone at the table with the exception of the one incident at the District NAOP. It is not that great an inconvenience to your opps that you have only one cc filled out. I know that I have often had opponents who had only one cc filled out and no one ever thought to call the cops on them.

I find it a great inconvenience when the opponents have only one CC. If I want to look at it and partner has it, what do I do? Isn't even asking partner to pass it over improper communication with him?

Anyway, North Americans bring up this subject about once a week. I wish I could suggest a solution, because the problem seems intolerable.

[blackshoe]

ArtK78, on 2012-December-10, 15:32, said:

I was stating that my partner does not keep a private score and he almost never has a cc.

And I stated that it never made a difference to anyone at the table with the exception of the one incident at the District NAOP. It is not that great an inconvenience to your opps that you have only one cc filled out. I know that I have often had opponents who had only one cc filled out and no one ever thought to call the cops on them.

What was the purpose of the "different strokes" comment, then?

[Zelandakh]

mycroft, on 2012-December-10, 11:00, said:

I (used to) put my (unfolded, proper) CC under my bidding box, with the box covering the leads section. When I defended, I put the contract in, then put it under my bidding box, with the box moved to cover the defensive bidding section. I don't see what the problem is.

Because the opponents might think you are using the CC as a memory aid? The fact that most players with CCs seem to think this is what their cards are for leads me to withdraw the CC (always) and place it somewhere out of their sight. That said, the only pair round here that have a CC plays Precision and even that only gives opening bids and leads. The lady does keep a more detailed CC but it stays on her lap, something I only found out when she tried to get it out and check what her correct Stayman response should be during an auction.

The last non-club tournament I played was a festival affair where the organisers specifically said to us that CCs were not required. Since it is a bit of an effort to make one up in German (I always had a CC in England though) we played without one, instead pre-alerting the major system details. At one table I picked up the opponents' CC and started scanning it for anything unusual. While doing so, my RHO asked aggressively: "And where is yours?". "We don't have one," says my partner. "Then we don't either says she," snatching it out of my hands and pushing it into her bag. Fair enough. She was not amongst the least amiable there. It was a very "friendly" bridge festival.

Personally I would sooner have the atmosphere of American clubs than open rudeness at the bridge table. That said, if someone is rude then I can be (and am) pretty caustic. That would probably land me a few ZT penalties per year if I ever did play in America. Or perhaps I am overestimating how often these are given out. Certainly there were no ZT fines given out at the festival tournament even though I heard many complaints, particularly about (the wife of) a married couple from Munich (who also happened to finish in the Top 10).

[Vampyr]

mycroft, on 2012-December-10, 11:00, said:

I (used to) put my (unfolded, proper) CC under my bidding box, with the box covering the leads section. When I defended, I put the contract in, then put it under my bidding box, with the box moved to cover the defensive bidding section. I don't see what the problem is.

I don't think that it is very good to be moving your own convention card around. I consider mine my opponents' property until the round is over.

[blackshoe]

In England, that's a reasonable position. In North America, in the current bridge culture, it's not.

[mycroft]

Clearly, I didn't make sense, sorry. From the start of the round to the end, my CC is face up, unfolded, on RHO's left corner, and faced so she can read it (so I could read it at a 90 degree off true angle, true - but nobody's ever thought I was doing that), except when I take it away to use the scoresheet. Yes, I realize that's not best, but that's the way it works in the ACBL.

The box goes on top (so I can't actually see a bunch of the card even if I was looking), and covers a part of the card that's not in use. The card doesn't move (well, it always goes back to the same place); the box moves.

The benefit of this is that the opponents can always "check the card" with minimal transmission of UI; that benefit goes away if there isn't a second one on the other corner. Of course, since I'm the only one that does that, nobody bothers to look, which means the benefit goes away, too - but were the regulations actually adhered to, it would work. I'm sure that's not the only regulation anywhere that that comment applies to.

[Vampyr]

mycroft, on 2012-December-11, 14:49, said:

except when I take it away to use the scoresheet. Yes, I realize that's not best, but that's the way it works in the ACBL.

You could, if you wanted, score on the back side of a previously-used convention card; then your current card and your scoresheet would be separate.

[jillybean]

I'd say most players don't use the back of their CC for scoring but use a new CC sheet each time. The trouble is the CC sheet is folded with the score sheet
or stuck in the plastic holder, making them inseparable. How the CC is contructed or displayed isnt really the problem, it's not having one, having an incomplete, inaccurate CC or using a CC from another partnership that cause the problems.