[Vampyr]

peachy, on Apr 23 2010, 11:03 PM, said:

I have a preference for ACBL style regulation = keep it as the next-in-turn bidder's responsibility to take the mandatory pause.  Simple, whether stop card was used or not.

The reason for using the stop card is so that the next player can think, if he needs to, instead of having to also estimate the length of his pause.

[peachy]

Vampyr, on Apr 24 2010, 01:19 PM, said:

peachy, on Apr 23 2010, 11:03 PM, said:

I have a preference for ACBL style regulation = keep it as the next-in-turn bidder's responsibility to take the mandatory pause.  Simple, whether stop card was used or not.

The reason for using the stop card is so that the next player can think, if he needs to, instead of having to also estimate the length of his pause.

Estimating ten seconds is not hard work or difficult to do even if one has to choose a call to make. Anyway, I still find the whole stop card annoying; even where its use is mandated, the next person must still take about ten seconds when the stop card is withdrawn too fast, right? So using the card is not adding value or benefit to the game while the pause itself does add a benefit.

[Pict]

I have played against internationals who are very annoyed by people who do not follow the stop procedure.

I agree with them and Bluejak and various others.

Correct procedure creates an expected rhythm for the game, and it is not up to individual players to disrupt that rhythm for their opponents and partner at their own whim.

[pran]

[quote name='peachy' date='Apr 24 2010, 07:50 PM'] [quote name='Vampyr' date='Apr 24 2010, 01:19 PM']
Estimating ten seconds is not hard work or difficult to do even if one has to choose a call to make. Anyway, I still find the whole stop card annoying; even where its use is mandated, the next person must still take about ten seconds when the stop card is withdrawn too fast, right? So using the card is not adding value or benefit to the game while the pause itself does add a benefit. [/quote]
Having the skip bidder controlling the duration of the pause relieves his LHO from this burden and lets LHO concentrate on his call with no distracting responsibilities.

LHO is then free to call as soon as the STOP card is withdrawn even when done before the ten seconds have elapsed, but still cannot be "penalized" for waiting the full ten seconds he is entitled to.

If the STOP card is maintained too long LHO may not call until it is withdrawn.

Simple as that.

[Vampyr]

[quote name='pran' date='Apr 25 2010, 10:46 AM'] [quote name='peachy' date='Apr 24 2010, 07:50 PM'] [quote name='Vampyr' date='Apr 24 2010, 01:19 PM']
Estimating ten seconds is not hard work or difficult to do even if one has to choose a call to make. Anyway, I still find the whole stop card annoying; even where its use is mandated, the next person must still take about ten seconds when the stop card is withdrawn too fast, right? So using the card is not adding value or benefit to the game while the pause itself does add a benefit. [/QUOTE]
Having the skip bidder controlling the duration of the pause relieves his LHO from this burden and lets LHO concentrate on his call with no distracting responsibilities.

LHO is then free to call as soon as the STOP card is withdrawn even when done before the ten seconds have elapsed, but still cannot be "penalized" for waiting the full ten seconds he is entitled to.

If the STOP card is maintained too long LHO may not call until it is withdrawn.

Simple as that. [/quote]
Please do not misattribute quotes.

[peachy]

[quote name='pran' date='Apr 25 2010, 04:46 AM'] [quote name='peachy' date='Apr 24 2010, 07:50 PM'] [quote name='Vampyr' date='Apr 24 2010, 01:19 PM']
Estimating ten seconds is not hard work or difficult to do even if one has to choose a call to make. Anyway, I still find the whole stop card annoying; even where its use is mandated, the next person must still take about ten seconds when the stop card is withdrawn too fast, right? So using the card is not adding value or benefit to the game while the pause itself does add a benefit. [/QUOTE]
Having the skip bidder controlling the duration of the pause relieves his LHO from this burden and lets LHO concentrate on his call with no distracting responsibilities.

LHO is then free to call as soon as the STOP card is withdrawn even when done before the ten seconds have elapsed, but still cannot be "penalized" for waiting the full ten seconds he is entitled to.

If the STOP card is maintained too long LHO may not call until it is withdrawn.

Simple as that. [/quote]
Nobody, certainly not I, have said it isn't simple enough to follow the regulation, be it Norwegian, EBU, or ACBL, whatever.

I just prefer the simplest regulation = let the next-in-turn be solely responsible for taking the mandated pause. No fussing with the stop cards, and no opponent assigned to be the "tempo police".

[barmar]

Before bidding boxes, it was common for players to say, "Skip bid, please wait" before making a jump bid. The skip bidder didn't control the next player's tempo (he never has to say, "OK, stop waiting"), this was just a simple reminder.

I see the ACBL's Stop card procedure as a simple translation of that old mechanism to the use of bidding boxes. Showing the Stop card is precisely analogous to making that statement. Although they could have used it to improve the process, as many other RAs have, they chose to leave it as it was.

[pran]

Vampyr, on Apr 25 2010, 05:30 PM, said:

Please do not misattribute quotes.

Sorry.
Something strange must have happened when I tried to strip off what I didn't want to comment on.

[bluejak]

Vampyr, on Apr 24 2010, 07:19 PM, said:

peachy, on Apr 23 2010, 11:03 PM, said:

I have a preference for ACBL style regulation = keep it as the next-in-turn bidder's responsibility to take the mandatory pause.  Simple, whether stop card was used or not.

The reason for using the stop card is so that the next player can think, if he needs to, instead of having to also estimate the length of his pause.

The most important reason for correctly using the Stop card in the English way is the control of time is not in the hands of the next player. Now, people have said it is reasonable for the next player to control the tempo but it leads to uncontrollable UI.

If there is no Stop card, and the next player thinks for six seconds and passes, does that pass UI to his partner? Maybe: you do not know, only his partner knows whether this is faster or slower than normal, or just normal.

But if the opponent puts the card out for six seconds and then puts it away, and the next player calls, there is no obvious UI because he does not control the tempo.

peachy, on Apr 25 2010, 07:21 PM, said:

I just prefer the simplest regulation =  let the next-in-turn be solely responsible for taking the mandated pause.  No fussing with the stop cards, and no opponent assigned to be the "tempo police".

True, just lots of UI passed which opponents cannot know about, and thus a more unfair game.

[Free]

Mbodell made a list of problems with the stop card, but may I add a 7th one?

7. You place the stop card on the table and LHO bids before you've had a chance to place your call on the table.

Anyway, here's my opinion:
The purpose of the stop card is good, but not everyone uses it every time. The problem with it is that the stop procedure is there to protect your opponents, not yourself! Imo not using the stop card should mean there are consequences like "opponents can not give UI to each other if the stop card is not used".

It's not always useful (example your opps are Red and the auction goes something like 1♣-1♠-1NT-3♠, what's LHO gonna do?), but I wouldn't let average club players decide if it's useful or not.

Just make sure it has to be used every time. If you don't, the consequence is that opps can't be charged with illegal use of UI.

[blackshoe]

"Oh, you didn't use the stop card? Partner, I have a 6-5-1-1 10 count, including two aces."

[Free]

blackshoe, on Apr 27 2010, 02:41 PM, said:

"Oh, you didn't use the stop card? Partner, I have a 6-5-1-1 10 count, including two aces."

Djeez do I really have to spell it out for you? "UI from hesitations"

[blackshoe]

If you're writing a regulation, you better be sure to "spell it out" or we'll be right back here talking about how screwed up the regulation is.

[Free]

blackshoe, on Apr 28 2010, 03:10 PM, said:

If you're writing a regulation, you better be sure to "spell it out" or we'll be right back here talking about how screwed up the regulation is.

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, but did you see the word "like"? I never proposed this exact line as a new law, I just expressed my opinion about what type of consequences we could use.

In everything we write on a forum you can find some loopholes, but that doesn't mean the idea is wrong/poor.

[jkljkl]

Free, on Apr 28 2010, 09:48 AM, said:

In everything we write on a forum you can find some loopholes, but that doesn't mean the idea is wrong/poor. 

well I hope so, since it is the german regulation since many years

"[...]Unterlässt es ein Spieler „Stopp“ zu sagen oder gibt er die Reizung zu früh wieder frei, so verliert seine Seite das Recht, irgendwelche Ansprüche aus einer übermäßig verzögerten oder überhasteten Ansage eines Gegners herzuleiten.[...]"

~If a player does not use the stop card or retreats it prematurely his side will not get any redress from an overly fast or overly slow bidding by the opponent.

ciao stefan

[pran]

jkljkl, on May 5 2010, 09:37 AM, said:

Free, on Apr 28 2010, 09:48 AM, said:

In everything we write on a forum you can find some loopholes, but that doesn't mean the idea is wrong/poor. 

well I hope so, since it is the german regulation since many years

"[...]Unterlässt es ein Spieler „Stopp“ zu sagen oder gibt er die Reizung zu früh wieder frei, so verliert seine Seite das Recht, irgendwelche Ansprüche aus einer übermäßig verzögerten oder überhasteten Ansage eines Gegners herzuleiten.[...]"

~If a player does not use the stop card or retreats it prematurely his side will not get any redress from an overly fast or overly slow bidding by the opponent.

ciao stefan

I assume "overly slow bidding" still requires the call to be made within (approximately) the ten seconds limit from when the skip bid was made?

We have essentially the same regulation in Norway.

[jkljkl]

pran, on May 5 2010, 03:56 AM, said:

I assume "overly slow bidding" still requires the call to be made within (approximately) the ten seconds limit from when the skip bid was made?

Yes, but

The side that didn't use properly the stop card will retain the table score regardless of how long the oppenent thought.

If you think too long over the usual 10 seconds the UI can lead to a different score for your side according §16.

The whole story ending in a split score.

ciao
stefan

[Free]

jkljkl, on May 5 2010, 10:29 AM, said:

pran, on May 5 2010, 03:56 AM, said:

I assume "overly slow bidding" still requires the call to be made within (approximately) the ten seconds limit from when the skip bid was made?

Yes, but

The side that didn't use properly the stop card will retain the table score regardless of how long the oppenent thought.

If you think too long over the usual 10 seconds the UI can lead to a different score for your side according §16.

The whole story ending in a split score.

ciao
stefan

Awesome, you can actually punish your opps by thinking too long and partner making abuse of this! Should make this a meta agreement...