[sceptic]

LHO bid 1 heart pass pass (UNDO) quite quickly after pard had passed, which was granted

LHO then bid 4 hearts

LHO playing SAYC with a pick up pard no discussion

do you think this is ethical with a good 7 card heart suit and more than opening HCP

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     4♥    Pass
 Pass  Pass  

[helene_t]

No of course not.

The only problem is how to assure LHO that you don't say he's (deliberately) cheating.

[sceptic]

This is what I said, at the table, I felt I wanted to explain to the others at the table why I was leaving


"name deleted by me*******, you do not have a 4!H bid, you asked undo because your pard passed and you did not want that passing out, I do not like that sort of thing, it is unethical good bye

[Rain]

Don't grant undo. Especially since you are not granting undo to the passer, but to the opener. How can it be a misclick undo after 2 more bids?

[jillybean]

Illegal change of call.

No need to accuse LHO of cheating,just quote the laws; you are permitted to change an inadvertent call if done so immediately and without pause for thought. (Law25) Clearly this is not the case here

[kenberg]

Maybe it's not so much cheating or unethical as it is that he is just playing some other game where you get to change your own bid after hearing partner's. He needs to find a catchy name for this game and then write a book about bidding strategy when playing it. And then go somewhere else and play it.

The most annoying thing about such people, imo, is that when you call them on it they act as if they are being abused by uptight folks who take the game too seriously. The notion that someone is willing to violate the rules in order to win, and then complain about how seriously others take the game, is curious.

Anyway, I extend my sympathy.

Ken

[skjaeran]

jillybean2, on May 19 2007, 09:46 AM, said:

Illegal change of call.

No need to accuse LHO of cheating,just quote the laws; you are permitted to change an inadvertent call if done so immediately and without pause for thought. (Law25) Clearly this is not the case here

If you add "until his partner makes a call..", you've got it right. Here the undo came after his partner passed. Thus a change of call is illegal.

[jillybean]

I think folk might be taking this too err…seriously. Highly frustrating but maybe not cheating.

Players who learn the rules of the game from others believe these "rules" to be true. You cannot psyche in positions 1 or 2; all undo’s must be granted; I will get an automatic adjustment if the opps don’t alert; you must tell the opps what you have in your hand and so on. This is ignorance of the laws rather than cheating.

BBO players have a learned a lot of these ‘rules’.

[neilkaz]

Jlall, on May 19 2007, 02:16 AM, said:

helene_t, on May 19 2007, 02:38 AM, said:

No of course not.

The only problem is how to assure LHO that you don't say he's (deliberately) cheating.

No way I could be that restrained lol.

No kidding since the original call certainly could never have been 4♥ with that moose since slam is missed when PD has 2 aces in many cases.

Whether you call it cheating or not, this is really unethical .. neilkaz ..

[glen]

Maybe I'm clueless this morning, but didn't the ♥ bidder move from a contract that could make to a contract that is down? Or did the defense not use undos, as many as necessary (unusual vs. unusual, undo vs. undo), in order to cash the four tricks?

When leaving just offer a suitably lame excuse like "gotta go, my best goldfish was just attacked by a school of piranhas, and an undo will not save it!"

[foo]

Unethical as H&ll, but if Opener is allowed to use the UI from Responder's pass to change his call, so can I.

"Auction rewind all the way back to the 1st call? OK. X. Yep, I heard that Responder is broke too, and I know you were not strong enough to open 2C. Are you sure you want to play this tainted board?"

"You are? OK. I must warn you that regardless of result if we play this board I have to submit it to the 'yellow badges' as a Recorder Form afterward. Are you sure you still want to play it?"

"Yes? Fine." ...and then GOP or I lead a trump.
(Since Responder is busted, we rate to have values in the side suits and Opener can't have everything given the bidding.)

...and now I have a "2 way shot". Good result on the board, no problem. Bad result, here cometh the Recorder Form.

[inquiry]

foo, on May 19 2007, 10:17 AM, said:

"You are? OK. I must warn you that regardless of result if we play this board I have to submit it to the 'yellow badges' as a Recorder Form afterward. Are you sure you still want to play it?"

I regret to inform you that yellows are not going to make a big case out of this. If you report it to one of us (i am a "yellow badge"), the odds are great we will just issue a reminder to the player making the undo request that undo are for legitimate misclicks only. Or we might do nothing if we are busy. When we usually get involved is when events after the undo turn unpleasant. The reason why this is true, is that allowing and disallowing undo's are up to the players involved. Some players allow all undos, other never allow them. Myself, i allow them up until the players partner has made a bid. So I would have allowed the undo of 1H after the pass.

People complain to us when undos are asked for, when undos are not allowed, when undos are allowed and then silly things like this turn up. That is just too much to get involved with all the time... especially with some of the real problems that users cause that MUST be dealt with.

Best to mark this person as an enemy, excuse yourself from the table at the end of that hand, and find new opponents. There is an endless supply of new opponents.. that is a good thing.

[foo]

I'd rather not go around marking players as enemies more than I have to. Especially in a game with declining numbers of players like Bridge.
Nor does that solve either their problem nor anyone else's problem who runs into this pair when they attempt such shenanigans.

OTOH, if they get tagged one way or the other often enough, they will either change their habits, be forced to change their habits, or end up not being able to play Bridge in polite society any longer.

[helene_t]

Nah, most of us are here to have fun, not to educate the morons most of whom don't want to get educated anyway (and who can blame them? Most self-appointed bridge teachers are clueless).

I think Ben is right in not wasting time on such minor issues. Just mark the jerk as an enemy and get over it.

[jtfanclub]

I would be in favor of eliminating undos completely after partner has bid or played...ie., only one member of the partnership can ask for an undo at a time.

That fits the rules, and prevents repeatedly requests for undos.

[redbird97]

This reminds me of a story. I was playing against an opponent who asked for 3 undos in one hand. They all happened why he was playing a hand. One trick he ruffed low and I was able to over trump. Another trick he elected to take a ruffing finesse and when that failed, asked for an undo. Then when he played trumps, 9 card fit missing the Q, and banged em out, when pard showed out, asked for another one. Needless to say, he was 0/3 in undos granted...