[aguahombre]

I would appreciate references to any current position (minutes, etc.) which have determined what constitutes a "final pass", ending an auction ---other than the obvious placing of a green card on the table.

Tapping previous pass card?
picking up one's bidding cards to put them away?
etc.

[blackshoe]

This is a matter for the RA. Are you asking for the ACBL position?

Anyway, IMO, the only legitimate final pass, using bidding boxes, is one where the pass card is placed on the table. I do not know if the ACBL agrees with me. I'm pretty sure at least some of the club directors around here don't.

[campboy]

FWIW, the EBU Orange Book includes the following regulation.

OB 7B11 said:

Some players do not always complete the auction properly by laying a pass card on the table in the pass out seat. Usually this does not cause a problem. When a player acts in such a way as to indicate they have passed and an opening lead is faced they have passed. An action may be deemed by the TD to be a pass in the pass out seat (eg General 'waft' of the hand, tapping cards already there, picking up the cards).

[aguahombre]

I complied with requests from "Black" and "Blue" on previous threads, and put "ACBL" in the subtitle box. Am interested in, as stated, if there is other verbage than the wording of the regs themselves....such as director guidelines and newletters, minutes, rulings which have the clout to become precedent.

Focusing, on the final pass, only. Player, for instance, starts putting his bids away not noticing there was a bid and two passes to him, rather than 3 passes to his bid.

[blackshoe]

None such afaik.

In your "for example" if a player told me he thought there had been three passes, but there were not, he's still got a call coming.

[barmar]

What if he completed putting his cards away, made the face-down lead, then realized there were only two passes? Would you let him take back his lead and make a call?

[Mbodell]

barmar, on 2012-September-03, 16:49, said:

What if he completed putting his cards away, made the face-down lead, then realized there were only two passes? Would you let him take back his lead and make a call?

I would not, I'd rule final pass and the card on the table is the lead.

[Bbradley62]

The source of this is not quite clear to me; maybe someone else will understand the notation:
http://jsteelquist.c...kup/TECH/BIDBOX

[aguahombre]

Bbradley62, on 2012-September-03, 20:26, said:

The source of this is not quite clear to me; maybe someone else will understand the notation:
http://jsteelquist.c...kup/TECH/BIDBOX

Yes, it is quite clearly on target with my question. It differentiates between INTENT to pass and merely thinking the auction is already over. I wish I knew which Chief Director of what (in 2008) produced the treatise and in what context.

[Bbradley62]

It doesn't quote ACBL documentation, but see item #8 in the list of "speed up your club games" tips... http://home.comcast....chive/jun03.pdf

[kevperk]

Bbradley62, on 2012-September-03, 20:26, said:

The source of this is not quite clear to me; maybe someone else will understand the notation:
http://jsteelquist.c...kup/TECH/BIDBOX

This is located in the scoring program used by ACBL - ACBLScor. I believe the Chief Tournament Director in 2008 was Rick Beye. As a tournament director in the ACBL, I have been aware of this regulation.

[gnasher]

kevperk, on 2012-September-04, 01:30, said:

This is located in the scoring program used by ACBL - ACBLScor. I believe the Chief Tournament Director in 2008 was Rick Beye. As a tournament director in the ACBL, I have been aware of this regulation.

Is it a regulation?

[blackshoe]

Bbradley62, on 2012-September-03, 20:26, said:

The source of this is not quite clear to me; maybe someone else will understand the notation:
http://jsteelquist.c...kup/TECH/BIDBOX

That appears to be an extract from the techfiles, the latest version of which is only available within ACBLScore. The number ("bidbox.081") is higher than that on the version available at bridgehands ("bidbox.033") which leads me to believe it may be newer. Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to check the latest ACBLScore version. Note the bridgehands version does not discuss the question at hand. However, the steelquist version does discuss it, and implies that my answer to Barry's question should be "yes, I would let him take back his face down opening lead".

[blackshoe]

gnasher, on 2012-September-04, 01:55, said:

Is it a regulation?

In part. The TechFiles contain not just regulations (for the latest version of which I think one should look on the ACBL Website) but also interpretations, which is what that "CTD" thing is. And I'm pretty sure Rick Beye was ACBL CTD in 2008. I note that the position no longer exists. I have no idea why the ACBL abolished it. Cost cutting, perhaps?

[LH2650]

gnasher, on 2012-September-04, 01:55, said:

Is it a regulation?

Changes to the Tech Files in ACBLscore are approved by the ACBL Laws Commission, so I think that they can be considered regulations.

[kevperk]

blackshoe, on 2012-September-04, 06:26, said:

In part. The TechFiles contain not just regulations (for the latest version of which I think one should look on the ACBL Website) but also interpretations, which is what that "CTD" thing is. And I'm pretty sure Rick Beye was ACBL CTD in 2008. I note that the position no longer exists. I have no idea why the ACBL abolished it. Cost cutting, perhaps?

There are regional supervisors who were reporting to the CTD, who in turn reported to higher ups in the office. It was determine that it was unnecessary to have the added step in the hierarchy.

[blackshoe]

kevperk, on 2012-September-04, 11:27, said:

There are regional supervisors who were reporting to the CTD, who in turn reported to higher ups in the office. It was determine that it was unnecessary to have the added step in the hierarchy.

<shrug> I don't suppose it matters a whole lot. It just seems odd to me not to have a CTD.

[gnasher]

LH2650, on 2012-September-04, 07:16, said:

Changes to the Tech Files in ACBLscore are approved by the ACBL Laws Commission, so I think that they can be considered regulations.

On the other hand, it would be unusual to have regulations which aren't published in a form that is accessible to the people they regulate.

[LH2650]

gnasher, on 2012-September-04, 14:09, said:

On the other hand, it would be unusual to have regulations which aren't published in a form that is accessible to the people they regulate.

ACBLscore can be downloaded, and the Tech Files read, by anyone with a computer.

[Vampyr]

LH2650, on 2012-September-05, 18:54, said:

ACBLscore can be downloaded, and the Tech Files read, by anyone with a computer.

If it occurred to them that that's where they could find the regulations...