[gordontd]

Vampyr, on 2013-August-23, 10:49, said:

Well, I would expect that repeated misuse/lack of use of the stop card would incur a PP, but I don't think the opponents would complain often.

CSGibson, on 2013-August-23, 10:51, said:

Lack of use has never incurred a PP in ACBL land.

I thought their use was optional in the ACBL.

[gnasher]

gordontd, on 2013-August-25, 02:58, said:

I thought their use was optional in the ACBL.

From http://web2.acbl.org...Section%20A.pdf (a document whose status I'm unsure of).

Skip Bid Warning (953-102)
Previous regulations requiring a mandatory pause are rescinded and replaced with the following:
A. How and When Made
Players should protect their rights and the opponent's by announcing, prior to making an opening bid on the two level or higher, or prior to making any subsequent bid that skips one or more levels of bidding:
1. When bidding orally by saying, "I am a bout to make a skip bid. Please Wait!"
2. When using bidding boxes, by placing the stop card so the LHO sees it (the skip bidder is responsible for gaining LHO's attention). The skip bid is made. The stop card is replaced in the bidding box.
B. Skip Bidder
The skip bid warning may not be used to alert partner that a strength-showing bid is being made or not being made. The warning should be used all the time. The tournament director may assess a procedural penalty (Law 90) for failure to comply.

So it's not mandatory but you should do it all the time and you may be penalised for not doing so. Is that clearer?

[blackshoe]

About as much clearer as the usual ACBL dreck.

[cloa513]

It should be mandatory to reveal all hand after the end of play- declarer might miss a revoke in normal play.

[mycroft]

I don't usually face my hand when *accepting* a claim, nor do I know anyone who does. But that's another question.

I have had (rare) occasions where they just claimed and put their hands in the box. I want to make it clear that ABSOLUTELY NEVER do I think, nor would I think, that those players were attempting to conceal a revoke; they either were assuming that it was as clear what they held to the opponents as it was to them, or claiming that, knowing it wasn't true, and playing their usual "very good, but any vig I can get can't hurt" game (usually accompanied by a "oh, you haven't figured it out yet? I'm sorry, I thought you [read: anyone who can play] had" response to me asking to see the cards).