[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2019-September-07, 11:53, said:

According to the stated conditions of contest, they're playing the SAYC so their agreements are whatever's on the card.

SAYC doesn't have much to say about this stage of the auction. SAYC is 3-4 pages of general approach, not a tome like BWS that discuses dozens of situations.

[blackshoe]

barmar, on 2019-September-07, 12:32, said:

SAYC doesn't have much to say about this stage of the auction. SAYC is 3-4 pages of general approach, not a tome like BWS that discuses dozens of situations.

"Nothing on the card" implies they have no agreement. But "it's an individual" does not imply that they have no agreements at all.

[pescetom]

blackshoe, on 2019-September-07, 11:28, said:

There was a set of laws for online bridge produced in 2001. Not very good, I'm afraid, but they exist.

Interesting. Could you point us to a copy online?

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2019-September-08, 01:33, said:

Interesting. Could you point us to a copy online?

I used to have it bookmarked, but I think my bookmark stopped working at some point, because I removed it. IIRC, it was 90% of the regular Laws, but they mostly just removed things that were not applicable. E.g. online bridge prevents things like bidding/play out of turn, insufficient bids, revokes, so there's no need for Laws specifying how to resolve them.

And it probably allowed for self-alerting.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2019-September-09, 08:00, said:

I used to have it bookmarked, but I think my bookmark stopped working at some point, because I removed it. IIRC, it was 90% of the regular Laws, but they mostly just removed things that were not applicable. E.g. online bridge prevents things like bidding/play out of turn, insufficient bids, revokes, so there's no need for Laws specifying how to resolve them.

And it probably allowed for self-alerting.

If that is all they did then a lot more than 10% would disappear. But of course there are many new issues that need to be addressed,some of them quite complex like tempo management.

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2019-September-09, 08:42, said:

If that is all they did then a lot more than 10% would disappear. But of course there are many new issues that need to be addressed,some of them quite complex like tempo management.

It's been a long time since I read it, but I don't think they were nearly that ambitious. They weren't trying to force changes to online bridge, just make the Laws more relevant to it.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2019-September-09, 09:03, said:

It's been a long time since I read it, but I don't think they were nearly that ambitious. They weren't trying to force changes to online bridge, just make the Laws more relevant to it.

Sure. This time round they will hopefully be more ambitious. In the meantime, BBO and others have been forced/free to do their own thing. BBO made interesting choices about alerting, did you never consider undertaking tempo management? From what I can see as a player, tempo is completely transparent, like face to face bridge.

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2019-September-09, 14:08, said:

Sure. This time round they will hopefully be more ambitious. In the meantime, BBO and others have been forced/free to do their own thing. BBO made interesting choices about alerting, did you never consider undertaking tempo management? From what I can see as a player, tempo is completely transparent, like face to face bridge.

Relying on tempo is much less reliable in online bridge than in live bridge.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2019-September-09, 15:35, said:

Relying on tempo is much less reliable in online bridge than in live bridge.

What I was suggesting (and I imagine future laws will embrace) is that the software should actively make relying on tempo near impossible, not merely unreliable despite "best" effort of the software. Obviously this has impact on the average duration of each trick, on the time allowed to play normally to a given trick, on the possibility to request extra-time to decide, etc etc, all things that need to be newly regulated.

[blackshoe]

pescetom, on 2019-September-08, 01:33, said:

Interesting. Could you point us to a copy online?

It used to be available on the WBF website, but I can't find it there now.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2019-September-09, 19:41, said:

It used to be available on the WBF website, but I can't find it there now.

That's probably why I deleted my bookmark.