Bridge Winners Profile for Tom Peters
Basic Information
- Member Since
- Nov. 28, 2014
- Last Seen
- Jan. 20
- Member Type
- Bridge Player
Bridge Information
- ACBL Ranking
- None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
- Director call vs. fun
- Quite often it is an unjustified accusation of unethical behavior that leads to trauma.
- Is this AI or UI?
- I read Law 50E3 as saying the story of how the penalty card was created is UI. It does not say that the penalty card itself is UI.
- Is this AI or UI?
- Law 50E4 seems to cover Kit's hypothetical situation. "If following the application of E1 the Director judges at the end of play that without the assistance gained through the exposed card the outcome of the board could well have been different, and in consequence the non-offending side is damaged ...
- Help the UChicago Bridge Team Join the Coalition for Academic Teams
- You should point out the enormous amount of literature devoted to the game: books, magazines, and online. Any subject that has attracted that much scholarship is bound to be an intellectual endeavor and academics should appreciate this point.
- Frivolous play ruling
- Law 72A: "Duplicate bridge tournaments should be played in strict accordance with the Laws. The chief object is to obtain a higher score than other contestants whilst complying with the lawful procedures and ethical standards set out in these laws." The word "chief" greatly weakens this Law. Its inclusion suggests ...
- Insufficient Bid
- That's a surprise. I downloaded the 2017 Laws from the ACBL site to my local hard drive in June 2017. It never occurred to me that they would change them. Alex and Ray, thanks for clearing this up.
- Insufficient Bid
- Alex, that is not correct. See part 1. 2017 Law 26B: "Lead Restrictions When an offending player’s call is withdrawn and it is not replaced by a comparable call, then if he becomes a defender declarer may, at the offender’s partner’s first turn to lead (which may ...
- Insufficient Bid
- I would never mastermind this in the South seat because I have described my hand and partner has not. I would reject the 4♣ bid and force East to deal with his mistake. The lead penalties of Law 26B are so draconian that defending 4♠ isn't really ...
- Insufficient Bid
- It would be authorized information for everyone that you chose not to accept the 4♣ bid.
- Zero Tolerance Card in Club Games
- Showing a ZT card to another player to indicate that they are committing a ZT violation ... seems like a ZT violation. You are not the Director. You don't have the right to accuse other players of behaving badly. Law 74A2: "A player should carefully avoid any remark or extraneous ...
See all comments
Not following anyone yet