[kenrexford]

I had an inquiry recently and am seeking feedback. A pair is using a system that they occasionally mess up, while they are learning the system. This seems rather unavoidable, as any new approach requires some degree of learning to work through. Also, I consider the fact that people who have played Standard American for 30 years do not understand Standard American.

What are the rules with regard to system competence?

[Hanoi5]

Rules? I don't think there are rules. Probably common sense should push people towards changing the system or keeping it and studying it more. Maybe the Director could have a private talk with a pair telling the to either stop messing up or change the system or stop playing together, but there's nothing written about it in the laws that I know of.

[Siegmund]

The only "rule" I am aware of is that you must correctly disclose your agreements to your opponents -- an obligation from which you are not freed just because you forget the agreements yourself. If one of you forgets something it makes it difficult to provide an explanation, if both of you forget at the same time, it makes it look like whatever you both accidentally did was something you both had agreed to do. Either way its a pain for all concerned to try to drag the truth out, and lots of UI gets passed from all the hemming and hawing answering questions (or just from the pained looks on faces.)

[aguahombre]

I believe there are rules in conditions of contest for certain events regarding responsibility for knowing at least the first couple of rounds of your system. Someone else might be able to link a few of them.

I also think at the club level a director has the power to do a lot of things not addressed in general rules, which might include taking action against a pair who create chaos because they don't know their system.

Of course, if Bobby Wolff were in charge....

[jeffford76]

In general it is not an infraction to forget your system. Obviously if your partner gives you unauthorized information that you have misbid, you cannot take advantage of it to get out of trouble.

However if a partner consistently forgets in the same way it may create an implicit understanding, and that must be disclosed to the opponents. If the combination of the implicit understanding and agreement would be illegal, then they have to stop playing it or stop forgetting it. (For example in the ACBL in GCC events, playing 2D as diamonds or majors isn't legal, so it's also not legal to play "2D is majors but he forgets a lot and just has diamonds".)

Where the line is between a couple of forgets and an implicit understanding is at the discretion of the director. Certainly if the other partner is catering for forgets, they have an implicit agreement, but it probably comes sooner than that.

[blackshoe]

Where the line is drawn is surely at the director's discretion, but a director who rules that "one swallow makes a summer" — i.e. that one instance damns you forever — is IMO exhibiting very poor judgement, particularly when he knows that the pair are trying to learn something new.

[Statto]

Should this be on IBLF?

[aguahombre]

Statto, on 2012-June-12, 20:15, said:

Should this be on IBLF?

No.

[guido]

For what it is worth, Bobby Wolff had a long-running campaign to punish those guilty of SD (his abbreviation for System Disruption). He light still be campaigning for it for all I know.

[blackshoe]

Wolff's crusade may be a good idea at his level of the game. It's a very bad idea at low levels. The line should be drawn somewhere in the middle, but you have to give folks space to try new things, or the game dies. AFAIK, Wolff hasn't given up his crusade.