[david_c]

Quantumcat, on Jun 15 2007, 05:10 PM, said:

On a serious note do you know if encrypted signals are banned in Australia too or just the US?

They are banned. You can find the ABF system regulations on their website (here), and look at section 2.7.

[Quantumcat]

david_c, on Jun 15 2007, 11:15 AM, said:

They are banned.

Phooey!

[Fluffy]

I faced a dilema at my local.

The key suits were

♠Q62
♣Q10

♠AK98
♣862

after telling the world we failed to stop clubs we ended up in 4♠.

3 rounds of clubs produced a ruff in dummy and an overruff by RHO (with the 3, my mistake)

I won the red suit return, played ♠Q, then ♠6.

At this point RHO seemed to hesitate for a tiny bit, but played small spade in less than 2 seconds.

I glared at LHO's face and I 'read' like she was making a decision, wich should be what to discard.

The lawyer in me said that RHO wanted to split ♠ honnos but finally played small so he doesn't give em any clues.

The mathematician of course was saying, don't be stupid, you have a good legitimate chance of playing for spades 3-3 or 2-4, don't male silly moves based on such thin arguments wich require RHO to make a gross mistake.

The lawyer won this time (he doesn't very often, my mathematician usuall takes priority), and the ♠9 held the trick while LHO discarded. If it wasn't at our local Lawyer might had not won this time.

[Impact]

Quantumcat, on Jun 15 2007, 11:10 AM, said:

I guess since the root of Minus One is imaginary, lawyers might be able to discuss the concept at great length

On a serious note do you know if encrypted signals are banned in Australia too or just the US? They sound amazing. Of course at the moment I hardly remember to pay attention to any of partner's spots anyhow but the concept is so interesting to read about.

[Edit: the first line is a joke. I don't know if a non-aussie would understand it though]

Yes - encrypted signals are banned: first there was a request about 4 years ago for an explanation of encrypted signals from the then ABF tournament committee chairman.

As a matter of courtesy I responded at considerable length. The only feedback I received was that my partnership was the only one (admitting to) playing encrypted signals.

Two years later - and without the courtesy of an explanation for the decision from the committee, or an opportunity to defend the use of the signals under law, the ABF amended their rules/regulations on the website with a blanket ban:-

http://www.abf.com.a...ystemRegs06.pdf at 2.7

I believe that such restrictions are really contrary to the laws of bridge but bizarrely are permitted variations by the general leeway granted sponsoring organisations.

The only rationale I can see is that it might actually force a few players encountering such to THINK outside their usual parameters (or perhaps at all!). Obviously that would be contrary to the desires of any bureaucracy - much less an established status quo.

regards,

[rbforster]

Impact, on Jun 12 2007, 12:27 AM, said:

(Banning encrypted signals) was another example of mindless banning of the sophisticated method because the "average" person found it all too hard!

Sadly there is all too much of this in the US and elsewhere. I am not entirely familiar with the "brown sticker" and similar classifications, but I kind of like the idea that enough unusual methods puts you in a "higher" category where you can't play the novices.

It would be an interesting experiment I think to allow almost everything, but say, at most 1 weird thing per pair at the club level, up to 3 weird things at a regional, etc. Weird things could include relay systems, encrypted signals, very light openers, weak 2 bids on 4 card suits, weak bids that might or might not have the suit they bid, etc. I think this would be a good transition to a more tolerant and permissive bridge environment since club players would occasionally see each weird thing but not lots of them all at once. At some point it becomes like 2♦ multi - everyone has seen it, knows a basic defense, and isn't scared of it even if they don't choose to play it themselves. At that point you can allow it more generally, and give points for the newer even weirder stuff that has been invented since then.

[OleBerg]

Trinidad, on Jun 6 2007, 03:22 PM, said:

Is there any SO that knowingly allows encrypted signals?

Yes, they are allowed in Denmark, at least in theory. I write this because no-one plays them, but is has been dicussed at length (it can be quite cumbersome to explain people, why there IS full disclosure, when you play encrypted signals).

It will be interesting, for me at least, to see what happens, if they get some following.

I have tinkered a little with encrypted signals, but not being able to remember everything, I'll rather put my efforts elsewhere. But for players aspiring to the absolute top-level, there is an untread avenue here.