[McBruce]

At a recent ACBL sectional novice game, an auction was five rounds in and no pass cards had yet been played. The player due to bid next called the TD. "I want to know," he said in front of the other players (!), "if it is legal to look at the back of a pass card to see how much it will cost if I bid on and go down."

I am not making this up. Furthermore, it gets better...

But before I give the punch line, is this a Law 40C3 infraction?

[mrdct]

McBruce, on Aug 13 2010, 07:00 AM, said:

is this a Law 40C3 infraction?

Yes. Unless the regulating authority has put in place a condition of contest permitting players to consult the scoring table during the bidding or play, this would clearly be an illegal aid to memory, calculation or technique.

[peachy]

Yes, it is.
Of course there is also UI clearly expressed that the player was considering a sacrifice. I see no other reason for the question.

[blackshoe]

I can't wait to hear the punch line.

[McBruce]

So the fact that Law 40 concerns Partnership Agreements is not relevant? The scoring table is certainly not a partnership agreement. Surely Law 40C3a does not make Law 77 unauthorized information for anyone who hasn't committed it to memory. If a Director asks a player for his ACBL player number during a hand, is he not allowed to look in his wallet? If a player forgets the order of the suits, is he allowed to consult the arrangement of the cards in his bid-box? If a Director makes a ruling during an auction and a player wishes to consult the Director's Law Book, thinking that he may be able to show the Director a different Law that applies, is that also disallowed? There has to be some limit here.

I think the intent of Law 40C3a is to prevent players from using memory aids to remember their partnership agreements, and to require that information from the auction and the play be committed to memory without any sort of assistance until the hand is over. But the scoring table should never be unauthorized information.

[McBruce]

Here's the punch line:

The Director allowed the player to look, and decided not to give him the advice that a better place to look would be the back of the red card.

The player examined the scores on the back of the pass card, then put it back in the box and bid five diamonds. Shortly after, the TD left the table and came up to me and told me the story.

"I think if I were at the table," I said, "it would not require much in the way of high cards to venture a double."

Shows what I know. Five diamonds was passed out. Declarer made two overtricks. The field played 3NT and did better.

[blackshoe]

McBruce, on Aug 12 2010, 06:54 PM, said:

I think the intent of Law 40C3a is to prevent players from using memory aids to remember their partnership agreements, and to require that information from the auction and the play be committed to memory without any sort of assistance until the hand is over. But the scoring table should never be unauthorized information.

The problem is that, as in this case, the scoring table can be used to decide what to bid — and it is aids to memory that affect a player's bidding and play that are forbidden.

The lawmakers wrote a new law, 16A, in which they carefully delineated what information is authorized. The scoring table is not listed. They did leave the out that they might have said, in Law 77, that the scoring table is always AI, but they didn't do that either.

[peachy]

McBruce, on Aug 12 2010, 05:54 PM, said:

So the fact that Law 40 concerns Partnership Agreements is not relevant?  The scoring table is certainly not a partnership agreement.  Surely Law 40C3a does not make Law 77 unauthorized information for anyone who hasn't committed it to memory.  If a Director asks a player for his ACBL player number during a hand, is he not allowed to look in his wallet?  If a player forgets the order of the suits, is he allowed to consult the arrangement of the cards in his bid-box?  If a Director makes a ruling during an auction and a player wishes to consult the Director's Law Book, thinking that he may be able to show the Director a different Law that applies, is that also disallowed?  There has to be some limit here.

I think the intent of Law 40C3a is to prevent players from using memory aids to remember their partnership agreements, and to require that information from the auction and the play be committed to memory without any sort of assistance until the hand is over.  But the scoring table should never be unauthorized information.

During the auction, the scoring table is of course authorised information to use and it is used all the time but if you don't remember what the numbers are and need to look it up, the memory aid is illegal. Partnership agreements are also AZI but consulting the system card or notes is not allowed during the auction.

The headings on laws are not part of the law, they are just headings. If I am mistaken about this, I hope somebody would tell me why.

I am not sure where this discussion is headed

[mrdct]

McBruce, on Aug 13 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

So the fact that Law 40 concerns Partnership Agreements is not relevant?

Correct. A fairly well established principle of interpretation of legislation, laws and contracts is that headings are for convenience only and do not control or affect the meaning or construction of any provisions therein. The Introduction to the 2007 Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge reinforces this with the comment: "Many headings present in the 1997 Laws have been removed in the interests of streamlining their appearance. Where headings remain they do not limit the application of any law, nor indeed does the omission of a cross-reference.".

McBruce, on Aug 13 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

If a Director asks a player for his ACBL player number during a hand, is he not allowed to look in his wallet?

Wrong. Law 81C1 empowers the Director to maintain discipline and to ensure the orderly progress of the game which obviously includes dealing with administrative matters such as capturing a unknown player's ACBL player number to enter into the scoring program. In any case, such a request is completely irrelevent to the bidding and play so could not be construed as an aid to memory, calculation or technique.

McBruce, on Aug 13 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

If a player forgets the order of the suits, is he allowed to consult the arrangement of the cards in his bid-box?

No. Doing so would clearly be an aid to memory, calculation or technique although this is obviously impossible to enforce and is a strong argument for using written bidding to mitigate the risk of players cheating in this manner (albeit a fairly low risk in an event of significant meaning).

McBruce, on Aug 13 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

If a Director makes a ruling during an auction and a player wishes to consult the Director's Law Book, thinking that he may be able to show the Director a different Law that applies, is that also disallowed?

Clearly disallowed under Law 74B1 (paying insufficient attention to the game). If a player doesn't like a ruling, he has ample time to review the Laws after play or during a break together with options to appeal.

[mrdct]

peachy, on Aug 13 2010, 09:12 AM, said:

During the auction, the scoring table is of course authorised information to use and it is used all the time ...

I totally and fundamentally disagree. I regularly play in some pretty low-standard club duplicates packed with beginners and social players who need to look-up the score for 4♥+1 and I have never in my life seen a player consult the scoring table during the auction. Looking at the scoring table during the auction is about as overt as one could possibly get in terms of breaching Law 40C3(a).

Law 40C3(a) is a further example as to why one must always ignore headings in legal interpretation as the heading, and indeed the sub-heading, are quite irrelevant to the actual point of law. In this case, the sub-heading is "Deviation from System and Psychic Action" which really has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of Law 40C3(a).

[hotShot]

Are you telling me that, if I accidentally grab the pass card and quickly turn it around and look at the numbers on the back, than I can put it back and bid some level of some denomination without getting trouble about UI?

[mrdct]

hotShot, on Aug 13 2010, 07:33 PM, said:

Are you telling me that, if I accidentally grab the pass card and quickly turn it around and look at the numbers on the back, than I can put it back and bid some level of some denomination without getting trouble about UI?

If you did that I think you would be passing UI and breaching 40C3(a).

[WellSpyder]

mrdct, on Aug 13 2010, 10:26 AM, said:

peachy, on Aug 13 2010, 09:12 AM, said:

During the auction, the scoring table is of course authorised information to use and it is used all the time ...

I totally and fundamentally disagree. I regularly play in some pretty low-standard club duplicates packed with beginners and social players who need to look-up the score for 4♥+1 and I have never in my life seen a player consult the scoring table during the auction. Looking at the scoring table during the auction is about as overt as one could possibly get in terms of breaching Law 40C3(a).

Actually, I don't think you are disagreeing at all!

Peachy's point was that most players use knowledge of the scoring table during the bidding in judging whether to sacrifice, double, accept a push or whatever. That doesn't mean that we look at a scoring table in order to get the necessary knowledge since experienced players have a pretty good idea of the scoring table without looking it up!

So there is nothing contradictory at all in saying that using the scoring table is using AI, but that looking at the scoring table is a prohibited memory aid.

[helene_t]

Lol this thread is awesome. Suppose p answers two aces to Blackwood and I have two myself but I forgot what 2+2 is, then I am not allowed to use my fingers to count?

Suppose I considered bidding 7NT but forgot how to read Arabic numbers so not sure how many odd tricks 7NT is. Am I not allowed to count the number of heart symbols on my own ♥7 card to find out?

[mrdct]

helene_t, on Aug 13 2010, 08:39 PM, said:

Lol this thread is awesome. Suppose p answers two aces to Blackwood and I have two myself but I forgot what 2+2 is, then I am not allowed to use my fingers to count?

Suppose I considered bidding 7NT but forgot how to read Arabic numbers so not sure how many odd tricks 7NT is. Am I not allowed to count the number of heart symbols on my own ♥7 card to find out?

No and no.

[bluejak]

helene_t, on Aug 13 2010, 11:39 AM, said:

Lol this thread is awesome. Suppose p answers two aces to Blackwood and I have two myself but I forgot what 2+2 is, then I am not allowed to use my fingers to count?

Suppose I considered bidding 7NT but forgot how to read Arabic numbers so not sure how many odd tricks 7NT is. Am I not allowed to count the number of heart symbols on my own ♥7 card to find out?

There is a Law to be followed. Finding silly examples does not mean that the Law need not be applied, especially in non-silly cases. Of course, TDs will not run round looking for the silly cases.

Mind you, I think you are in for a shock. Dependent on its design, a ♥7 has either nine or eleven little hearts on, so if you use that as an aid to counting you are going to overbid a lot!

Incidentally, I am getting worried. I see a problem, I think of an answer - and mrdct has already made every point that I was going to.

[helene_t]

bluejak, on Aug 13 2010, 12:48 PM, said:

Mind you, I think you are in for a shock. Dependent on its design, a ♥7 has either nine or eleven little hearts on, so if you use that as an aid to counting you are going to overbid a lot!

Actually I will be underbidding: bidding 3♥ or 5♥ when I should have bid 7 (I will thing the Arabic 3 or 5 correspond to 7 odd tricks).

[Cascade]

mrdct, on Aug 13 2010, 11:07 PM, said:

helene_t, on Aug 13 2010, 08:39 PM, said:

Lol this thread is awesome. Suppose p answers two aces to Blackwood and I have two myself but I forgot what 2+2 is, then I am not allowed to use my fingers to count?

Suppose I considered bidding 7NT but forgot how to read Arabic numbers so not sure how many odd tricks 7NT is. Am I not allowed to count the number of heart symbols on my own ♥7 card to find out?

No and no.

I assume this means the same as the answers "Yes and Yes" to the non-negated questions:

"I am allowed to use my fingers to count?"

"Am I allowed to count the number of heart symbols on my own ♥7 card to find out?"

[peachy]

mrdct, on Aug 13 2010, 04:26 AM, said:

peachy, on Aug 13 2010, 09:12 AM, said:

During the auction, the scoring table is of course authorised information to use and it is used all the time ...

I totally and fundamentally disagree.

Looking at the scoring table is not allowed. Just like looking at one's own convention card is not allowed. However, the knowledge of how much an undertrick or doubled undertrick is, is authorized information and is used by everybody. If however, the player does not know that or does not remember it, he is not allowed to find out from the scoring table during the auction.

[campboy]

bluejak, on Aug 13 2010, 12:48 PM, said:

Mind you, I think you are in for a shock. Dependent on its design, a ♥7 has either nine or eleven little hearts on, so if you use that as an aid to counting you are going to overbid a lot!

A lot of them nowadays have ten little hearts and a weird splodge in the middle