Norwegian STOP bid regulations Norway
#1
Posted 2010-July-11, 01:36
1. When do these apply? For example, if the auction starts: 2♠-P-P-3♣ is Opener expected to pause?
2. If a player doubles (or redoubles) a bid at the 3-level, does that count as a STOP?
3. How long are players expected to pause for? If the 3-level bidder displays the STOP card for only a very short period of time (or fails to use the STOP card at all) is the next player obliged to pause anyway?
4. Are all players expected to pause in a competitive auction at the 3-level or is it just the RHO of the bidder?
5. Are the STOP rules properly observed by most players?
6. Do you find that some auctions take a long time to complete? Suppose the auction goes:
1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠
3♣-3♦-3♥-3♠
4♥-4♠-Dbl-Pass
Pass-Pass
#2
Posted 2010-July-11, 04:00
http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=0entry401471
#3
Posted 2010-July-11, 04:27
A: General
STOP is used to give opponents 10 seconds compulsory pause for thought after a call that must be expected to cause need for consideration. Pause for thought is most common after skip bids (including opening bids on level 2 or higher) and in competitive auctions at level 3 and higher.
A STOP pause for thought begins after opponents have received answers to possible questions on the call.
The pause shall last approximately 10 seconds and it is the duty of the player who has displayed the STOP card (or said "STOP") to mark the expiration of the pause.
B: STOP with compulsory pause for thought
Pause shall be announced displaying a STOP card or by saying "STOP":
- with opening bids at the level 2 or higher
- with all skip bids
- with all calls except PASS in all competitive auctions from level 3 and up.
A player who displays the STOP card or says "STOP" forces his LHO to delay calling until the STOP card is retracted or for instance "continue" is spoken.
LHO is according to these rules always entitled to 10 seconds pause for thought in the specified situations regardless of whether or not STOP was used.
It is correct tempo to wait these seconds.
A pause for thought that is considerably longer or shorter than 10 seconds is therefore considered to possibly conveying unauthorized information even if RHO failed to display the STOP card or saying "STOP".
Players' variations in tempo can still convey unauthorized information also within the new limits.
C: Comments
These comments are not part of this regulation but rather to help applying it.
Correct tempo:
- Pause for thought is now defined the same whether or not STOP is correctly used.
- Players that call slightly too early or too slow when RHO failed to use STOP are to be treated "leniently".
- Very quick or very late action can convey unauthorized information and thereby limit partner's options.
Competition is to be expected when both sides have called on the 2-level.
- if one of the sides does not call (other than pass) on the 3-level (or during an entire round of the auction) then STOP is not used thereafter.
- This STOP rule is reinstated if that side again makes a call other than PASS.
--------------------------------------------------------
A personal note: I suspect there is a slip of the pen when the "comments" require both sides to having called (other tnan pass) at the 2-level for the auction to be considered competitive at the 3-level and up.
The way I understand the rule a competitive auction exists from the 3-level and up when both sides have called (other than pass) below the 3-level unless at any time during the auction both players on one side have passed at their respective latest turn to call.
#4
Posted 2010-July-11, 05:25
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 05:27 AM, said:
A: General
STOP is used to give opponents 10 seconds compulsory pause for thought after a call that must be expected to cause need for consideration.
The use of the STOP command conveys to partner that you consider the opponent is to take ten seconds prior to calling. This consideration is bridge information as to your judgment. The presence and absence of the STOP command is a system of communication with partner other than by call or play and is in conflict with L73B2 which describes the most heinous of bridge crimes. As described by L80B2f such regulation is illegal.
#5
Posted 2010-July-11, 08:08
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#6
Posted 2010-July-11, 16:22
axman, on Jul 11 2010, 12:25 PM, said:
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 05:27 AM, said:
A: General
STOP is used to give opponents 10 seconds compulsory pause for thought after a call that must be expected to cause need for consideration.
The use of the STOP command conveys to partner that you consider the opponent is to take ten seconds prior to calling. This consideration is bridge information as to your judgment. The presence and absence of the STOP command is a system of communication with partner other than by call or play and is in conflict with L73B2 which describes the most heinous of bridge crimes. As described by L80B2f such regulation is illegal.
What do you mean?
Using STOP when none is required is an irregularity.
Not using STOP when one is required is a violation of regulation.
Varying between using and not using STOP (wether or not required in the actual situation) in order to communicate to partner is a serious infraction of Law 73.
#7
Posted 2010-July-11, 16:25
blackshoe, on Jul 11 2010, 03:08 PM, said:
And so what?
Is five minutes delay caused by discussion, TD call, TD ruling, more discussion and eventually an appeal any better?
This regulation seems to work well in Norway.
#8
Posted 2010-July-11, 16:39
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 11:27 AM, said:
Thanks for the information. Official or not, I can assure you that your translation from Norwegian to English will be far more accurate than I could even dream of achieving!
In your experience, are Norwegian players quite good at following these rules?
#9
Posted 2010-July-11, 19:17
Nick
#10
Posted 2010-July-11, 21:52
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 06:25 PM, said:
Is five minutes delay caused by discussion, TD call, TD ruling, more discussion and eventually an appeal any better?
This regulation seems to work well in Norway.
And so nothing. You in Norway can do what you like. Just don't expect the rest of the world to follow your lead.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#11
Posted 2010-July-12, 02:35
jallerton, on Jul 11 2010, 11:39 PM, said:
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 11:27 AM, said:
Thanks for the information. Official or not, I can assure you that your translation from Norwegian to English will be far more accurate than I could even dream of achieving!
In your experience, are Norwegian players quite good at following these rules?
At club level: NO
At higher level: Yes
And at any level the first thing I "investigate" when summoned to an allegation of BIT during the auction is if the regulation has been observed. If not I just let the auction continue without any rectification unless there is overwhelming evidence of improper and deliberate gross break in tempo for no bridge reason.
#12
Posted 2010-July-12, 02:45
blackshoe, on Jul 12 2010, 04:52 AM, said:
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 06:25 PM, said:
Is five minutes delay caused by discussion, TD call, TD ruling, more discussion and eventually an appeal any better?
This regulation seems to work well in Norway.
And so nothing. You in Norway can do what you like. Just don't expect the rest of the world to follow your lead.
I simply cannot see how "we in Norway can do what we like"?
When the STOP regulation is observed any BIT is easily established and the player making a STOP is protected if his LHO breaks tempo.
The consequence of not using STOP when required is that the player is not protected.
In either case any information partner can infer except from the call itself is extraneous.
And I don't care what the rest of the world do (but I suppose I am permitted to worry on behalf of the game of Bridge?)
#13
Posted 2010-July-12, 03:45
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 02:17 AM, said:
Which part of England do you live in?
#14
Posted 2010-July-12, 08:03
gnasher, on Jul 12 2010, 09:45 AM, said:
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 02:17 AM, said:
Which part of England do you live in?
South East.
#15
Posted 2010-July-12, 09:03
pran, on Jul 12 2010, 04:45 AM, said:
I meant that your NBO can make whatever regulation it likes in this area provided it's consistent with the laws, of course.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#16
Posted 2010-July-12, 09:04
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 10:03 AM, said:
gnasher, on Jul 12 2010, 09:45 AM, said:
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 02:17 AM, said:
Which part of England do you live in?
South East.
Sounds a lot like the South Bronx.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#17
Posted 2010-July-12, 18:17
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#18
Posted 2010-July-12, 20:40
blackshoe, on Jul 12 2010, 04:04 PM, said:
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 10:03 AM, said:
gnasher, on Jul 12 2010, 09:45 AM, said:
NickRW, on Jul 12 2010, 02:17 AM, said:
Which part of England do you live in?
South East.
Sounds a lot like the South Bronx.
I live in the South East also, and it seems to me that people who state that they are "reserving their rights" are being at least a little belligerent and hostile. After all, it is a meaningless phrase, so what reason, other than to annoy your opponent, exists for uttering it?
#19
Posted 2010-July-12, 21:20
pran, on Jul 12 2010, 03:35 AM, said:
jallerton, on Jul 11 2010, 11:39 PM, said:
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 11:27 AM, said:
Thanks for the information. Official or not, I can assure you that your translation from Norwegian to English will be far more accurate than I could even dream of achieving!
In your experience, are Norwegian players quite good at following these rules?
At club level: NO
At higher level: Yes
And at any level the first thing I "investigate" when summoned to an allegation of BIT during the auction is if the regulation has been observed. If not I just let the auction continue without any rectification unless there is overwhelming evidence of improper and deliberate gross break in tempo for no bridge reason.
If the regulation is not observed/followed/enforced, it has no teeth and would possibly have the side effect of reducing respect for regulations in general. Anyway, if it works fine, fine. The waste of time still seems too great for me.
#20
Posted 2010-July-13, 00:44
peachy, on Jul 13 2010, 04:20 AM, said:
pran, on Jul 12 2010, 03:35 AM, said:
jallerton, on Jul 11 2010, 11:39 PM, said:
pran, on Jul 11 2010, 11:27 AM, said:
Thanks for the information. Official or not, I can assure you that your translation from Norwegian to English will be far more accurate than I could even dream of achieving!
In your experience, are Norwegian players quite good at following these rules?
At club level: NO
At higher level: Yes
And at any level the first thing I "investigate" when summoned to an allegation of BIT during the auction is if the regulation has been observed. If not I just let the auction continue without any rectification unless there is overwhelming evidence of improper and deliberate gross break in tempo for no bridge reason.
If the regulation is not observed/followed/enforced, it has no teeth and would possibly have the side effect of reducing respect for regulations in general. Anyway, if it works fine, fine. The waste of time still seems too great for me.
Maybe you misunderstood me?
Players who don't observe the regulation and fail to use STOP when required (for instance during a competitive auction) soon learn when they discover that their request for rectification after an alleged BIT is (in most cases) dismissed immediately.
The regulation is of course observed by the directors.

Help
