[Phil]

I feel like I've been ornery lately.

Convention cards are the latest object of my scorn. When I sit down to play against you I want to know several basic things:

- your basic approach
- NT opening range
- what you play over my NTs
- carding and leads
- anything else unusual you think I should know.

I do not really care if you play Puppet Stayman, Splinters or Inverted Minors. At least when I initially sit down. I also should not have to request to see your card. This data should be on the table in large type that I can see without a lot of fuss.

Yet all of this vital information gets the same billing as the likes of support doubles. If I want to know your carding I either need to ask or decipher a reply like "standard".or I have to squint at 6 point type and create a delay.

Convention cards are for me, your opponent. They aren't your cheat sheet you used to keep in your lap when you took your geography exams. Its not coy when pretend to pick up a napkin on the floor to sneak a peek and double check how you show a negative over 2♣, its cheating.

Also, convention cards are not for artistic expression. I know you like to show off your Illustrator skills but I do not want to see photos of your grandkids or your cats when I want to know if your husbands snapping ♦5 is odd even or not.

[wyman]

Or at T1:

"Your leads and carding, please?"

"Odd-even."

[ArtK78]

Phil, on 2012-February-03, 10:18, said:

I feel like I've been ornery lately.

Convention cards are the latest object of my scorn. When I sit down to play against you I want to know several basic things:

- your basic approach
- NT opening range
- what you play over my NTs
- carding and leads
- anything else unusual you think I should know.

I do not really care if you play Puppet Stayman, Splinters or Inverted Minors. At least when I initially sit down. I also should not have to request to see your card. This data should be on the table in large type that I can see without a lot of fuss.

Yet all of this vital information gets the same billing as the likes of support doubles. If I want to know your carding I either need to ask or decipher a reply like "standard".or I have to squint at 6 point type and create a delay.

Convention cards are for me, your opponent. They aren't your cheat sheet you used to keep in your lap when you took your geography exams. Its not coy when pretend to pick up a napkin on the floor to sneak a peek and double check how you show a negative over 2♣, its cheating.

Also, convention cards are not for artistic expression. I know you like to show off your Illustrator skills but I do not want to see photos of your grandkids or your cats when I want to know if your husbands snapping ♦5 is odd even or not.

I agree with you - you are ornery lately.

[barmar]

Move to England. As I understand it, exchanging CC's at the beginning of a round is common practice over there.

However, I do think the ACBL CC is pretty good at presenting the basic information you think is important.

However, the CC also serves another purpose: it's documentation that can be used as evidence to the TD in a misbid vs. misexplanation dispute.

[Phil]

BarMar has been corrupted by "the Man".

[Vampyr]

Phil, on 2012-February-03, 10:18, said:

- your basic approach
- NT opening range
- what you play over my NTs
- carding and leads
- anything else unusual you think I should know.

The first two items and the last they will mention before the round starts, and anyway these should be prominently displayed on the CC. Another poster has suggested how to deal with the fourth. As for the middle one, just ask as the round begins (but remember that you cannot change your NT range or parameters in response).

[aguahombre]

barmar, on 2012-February-03, 10:48, said:

Move to England. As I understand it, exchanging CC's at the beginning of a round is common practice over there.

It seems like a civilized thing to do, whether required or not (I don't know).

Of course, I could be my usual jerk self and proclaim that they don't share CC's over there at the beginning of a round, and let you figure out what I mean.

Edit: BTW...agree wholeheartedly with Phil.

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2012-February-03, 11:31

[jillybean]

Phil, on 2012-February-03, 10:18, said:

I feel like I've been ornery lately.

- your basic approach
- NT opening range
- what you play over my NTs
- carding and leads
- anything else unusual you think I should know.

Vampyr, on 2012-February-03, 11:14, said:

The first two items and the last they will mention before the round starts, and anyway these should be prominently displayed on the CC.

You can't be so sure. At a recent sectional LHO opened (1♠) P (1N) I paused waiting for an alert with none forthcoming I looked over at LHO's CC and in bold letters
was written STANDARD AMERICAN. So I bid my weak 6 hearts 2♥ (2♠) P (4♠) pass pass pass !

RHO says you should have alerted 1N!

Hold on, I would not have bid ♥ had I known 1N was forcing, I don't want a lead coming into my KJxxxx. I didn't say this to the table but
did call the director.

Director is called and LHO says well it does say 2/1 on my CC. Sure enough, when I looked closely the CC said

STANDARD AMERICAN 2/1



The director said play on, call me if there was damage. My partner dutifuly lead a ♥ contract makes +1

I call the director back and object, without a non natural ♥ lead they would not make the overtrick.
The director adjusts the board despite cries of "not fair" from my lho.

The most common item that I find missing from CC's is carding and when I ask I often get the response "Odd/Even" or "standard"

[barmar]

The ACBL CC has checkboxes for 2/1 GF and forcing 1NT. Were they not checked, or did you just not look hard enough?

And maybe I just play with a better class of players, but in my experience most who play odd/even have it checked on their CC as well.

[ArtK78]

jillybean, on 2012-February-03, 11:55, said:

You can't be so sure. At a recent sectional LHO opened (1♠) P (1N) I paused waiting for an alert with none forthcoming I looked over at LHO's CC and in bold letters
was written STANDARD AMERICAN. So I bid my weak 6 hearts 2♥ (2♠) P (4♠) pass pass pass !

RHO says you should have alerted 1N!

Hold on, I would not have bid ♥ had I known 1N was forcing, I don't want a lead coming into my KJxxxx. I didn't say this to the table but
did call the director.

Director is called and LHO says well it does say 2/1 on my CC. Sure enough, when I looked closely the CC said

STANDARD AMERICAN 2/1



The director said play on, call me if there was damage. My partner dutifuly lead a ♥ contract makes +1

I call the director back and object, without a non natural ♥ lead they would not make the overtrick.
The director adjusts the board despite cries of "not fair" from my lho.

The most common item that I find missing from CC's is carding and when I ask I often get the response "Odd/Even" or "standard"

So you complained that partner would not have led a heart because you would not have bid hearts if it weren't for the non-alert of the 1NT call. And the director gave you your trick back?

That is pretty funny.

[wyman]

Since several people have commented: the point of my post above was that "odd/even" does not address my question of "leads and carding?"

Indirectly I suppose it does, since thinking that "odd/even" is a sufficient response suggests that you would otherwise say "standard" even though you rarely give any meaningful signal at all and don't really know what "standard" means anyway.

Maybe this should be in the pet peeves thread, grumble grumble. I'm just trying to beat Phil in the race for Most Ornery BBOer 2012.

[paulg]

I think Phil will be happier to move to Scotland rather than England

SBU System Policy 10/2010 said:

2.2.2 At the start of each round, you should exchange convention cards with your opponents and inform them of

• Your basic method
  E.g. Natural with four-/five-card majors (specify the minimum length for one of a minor if fewer than four); Strong Club (specify minimum HCP for 1♣)
• The range of your opening 1NT, including any variations according to position and vulnerability
• The meaning of your two-level opening bids
  E.g. Strong Twos; Strong 2♣, Game-forcing 2♦ , Weak Twos in the majors; Weak Twos in three suits; Multi 2♦ ; Two-suited Weak Twos in the Majors
• Any unusual aspects of your system

List these items in a clearly identifiable area of your convention card.

[barmar]

wyman, on 2012-February-03, 12:20, said:

Since several people have commented: the point of my post above was that "odd/even" does not address my question of "leads and carding?"

My experience isn't so bad. The usual answers to that question I get are "standard leads, odd-even discards" (some are careful to say "first discard"), "standard", "Rusinow leads, Lavinthal discards", "3rd and 5th leads against suits". I don't think I've ever gotten an answer that only mentioned discards when I asked the more general "leads and carding" question.

Are people exaggerating the frequency of these failures, or am I really that much luckier than everyone else?

[wyman]

barmar, on 2012-February-03, 12:40, said:

My experience isn't so bad. The usual answers to that question I get are "standard leads, odd-even discards" (some are careful to say "first discard"), "standard", "Rusinow leads, Lavinthal discards", "3rd and 5th leads against suits". I don't think I've ever gotten an answer that only mentioned discards when I asked the more general "leads and carding" question.

Are people exaggerating the frequency of these failures, or am I really that much luckier than everyone else?

I would say the most common responses I hear at club games to the question "leads and carding?" are, in some order: "standard," "odd/even," "lavinthal," and just looking at me dumbfounded. In fact, once, a woman told me "lavinthal," and I repeated "sorry, not your first discard. Your leads and carding agreements please?" And she snapped back "well we don't play that way."

Additionally, it is problematic that "standard" can mean (in practice -- and good luck getting a ruling on this!) "standard leads and carding" or "we have no agreements." Occasionally you hear the almost musical "3rd and 5th, upside down count and attitude"

Obviously the nonsensical answers are far less common in the upper flights of flighted events.

[JLOGIC]

Phil when did you become a little old lady?

[blackshoe]

Played today against a pair I haven't seen playing together before. Two board rounds. RHO opens 2♠, they get to some contract or another, we misdefend, they make it. Second board, I pass, LHO opens 2♣, RHO alerts, partner asks. "We play EHAA". Partner asks "What's EHAA?" RHO describes his partner's basically undisciplined weak two in clubs. They get to some contract and make that one too. I said "it might have been nice, on board one, to know you were playing EHAA". LHO: "it's not alertable". Yes they had a CC. Where was it? I dunno. LHO was sitting on it, I think.

Against another pair, at one point partner asked to see her RHO's CC. I suggested she should have asked her LHO. Why? Because he never has one.

The ACBL CC was designed by someone who had no clue how to design a CC, or who was given poor direction as to the goals ACBL wanted for the design, or by a committee. ("A committee is an organism with six or more legs — and no brains".) ACBL would do well to learn from the EBU card and regulations (or even from the WBF card, for that matter).

Somebody who writes "STANDARD AMERICAN" in large capitals, followed by a small 2/1, deserves to have the score adjusted if his deception causes opponents to screw up.

[jillybean]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-03, 12:17, said:

So you complained that partner would not have led a heart because you would not have bid hearts if it weren't for the non-alert of the 1NT call. And the director gave you your trick back?

That is pretty funny.

Why funny?

[Phil]

JLOGIC, on 2012-February-03, 13:38, said:

Phil when did you become a little old lady?

Does that mean I can change my name to "PLOL"?

[mycroft]

So, have they got rid of the "Prealert for highly-weak preeempts" yet? I would suggest that a 2♠ opener mandatory (opposite an unpassed hand) on 85432 comes under that description. In fact, so does the Alert Procedures, explicitly:

Quote

NOTE: Partnerships whose systems include extremely aggressive methods, such as frequent use of four-card overcalls at the two level or higher, weak two-bids with bad five-card suits, or three-level preempts with bad six-card and/or most five-card suits must pre-Alert the opponents before the round begins. [Emphasis mine]

If the Pre-Alert has gone away, it's to be replaced by an Alert at the time of call, of course.

Even if none of that applies,

Quote

Treatments that show unusual strength or shape should be Alerted.

A 2♠ opening that could be on any hand you would open 2♠ on, *and* in addition, any suit quality from 85432 (65432, technically, but 85432 is the worst I've ever had) *through AKQT86543* and with *absolutely no* requirements or restrictions on outside cards (save the 6-12 HCP) is "unusual strength" *and* "shape".

EHAA 2♠ without any notification Pre, or Alert? Prima facie misinformation. "It's not Alertable"? BS. "But it's Natural"? Well, if Eric Landau (pre-)Alerts it, I think not doing so is right up there with that pair (pre-Announcement EBU) that played 1NT 15-17 NV, 12-14 VUL, explicitly because the opponents would misread the card.

And that kind of BS is really frustrating, because those of us who like playing strange things, but want the opponents to be on (as I can) a level playing field, and win because I play better or the system's better, get tarred with the same brush as these people.

Signed,
Mycroft (a, at the moment, *very* pissed off EHAA player, who has in fact played with Mr. Landau (once, anyway), so is speaking from personal experience)

[JLOGIC]

Phil, on 2012-February-03, 17:10, said:

Does that mean I can change my name to "PLOL"?

lol that was good