[jallerton]

campboy, on 2011-May-03, 16:30, said:

All three ACBL convention charts have the same rules for carding, which include

I asked about this exact method on the previous incarnation of the forum, but I was interested in whether it was permitted in the EBU. They have a similar prohibition against "dual-meaning" signals, and the response I got was that this method was "dual-meaning" and so not allowed.

The EBU L&EC confirmed at their most recent meeting that this signal was legal.
The case discussed was specifically that of playing middle encourage, high/low suit preference from a known suit.

The problem is that the phrase 'dual meaning' is wrong, but we couldn't articulate what a better wording would be. It's not two meanings, it's using two different attributes of the cards at the same time (e.g. both odd/even and high/low).
Bluejak is going to have a go at re-writing this at least to end up with wording that means what was originally intended.

[FrancesHinden]

The post above was kindly done on my behalf.

[bluejak]

jallerton, on 2011-September-23, 15:03, said:

Bluejak is going to have a go at re-writing this at least to end up with wording that means what was originally intended.

Suggestions welcome.

[semeai]

bluejak, on 2011-September-23, 18:57, said:

Suggestions welcome.

To be overly technical, I suppose you want to require that there be a (total) ordering of the cards (with ties allowed), and that the signal's meaning may depend only on relative placement in this ordering.

For example, simplistic odd-even uses a total ordering of odd > even (with all odd and all even tied). Sophisticated odd-even uses low odd > high odd > high even > low even (no ties). Standard and upside down use the obvious orderings. There's also simplistic high/low with (6 and up) > (under 6) with all ties among the two groups.

Maybe you could say that "signals may convey information only using one dimension of the cards." or "signals may convey information only in terms of relative placement along one dimension of the cards."

This is maybe not the best wording and sounds pseudo-scientific, so maybe just using attribute rather than dimension is better. An example showing that non-standard total orderings like the "sophisticated odd/even" one above should then be given, though, to clarify that this is allowed even if it looks like two "attributes" because the cards are placed along one axis/dimension (perhaps a further explanatory comment stressing that even so, the signal must only use the relative placement is then necessary).

The second is clearer by mentioning relative placement, but maybe then an explanatory comment that e.g. simplistic odd/even (and simplistic high/low) is allowed is necessary.

[gnasher]

bluejak, on 2011-September-23, 18:57, said:

Suggestions welcome.

You may not play a signalling method where one aspect of the card played sends one category of message, and simultaneously another aspect of the card sends another category of message.

Examples of methods that are forbidden:
(1) A high odd card is encouraging and even; a low odd card is encouraging and odd; a high even card is discouraging and even; a low even card is discouraging and odd.
(2) An odd card is encouraging; an even card is simultaneously discouraging and suit-preference.

Examples of methods that are allowed:
(1) An odd card is encouraging; an even card is discouraging
(2) An odd card is encouraging unless followed by a lower odd card; an even card is discouraging unless followed by a lower even card.
(3) A high card is encouraging and a low card is discouraging, but a very high card is suit-preference for the higher suit.
(4) A high card is encouraging; a low card is discouraging; a middle card is neutral.
(5) A high card may be even or encouraging according to the circumstances; a low card may be odd or discouraging according to the circumstances
(6) At trick one an odd card is encouraging and an even card is discouraging; later in the play a low card is encouraging and a high card is discouraging.
(7) An odd card is encouraging; an even card shows an even number. (Obviously this is absurd, but I believe the committee's intention is to make it legal.)
(8) An odd card is shows an odd number and an even card shows an even number, except that a very high card of either parity asks for a switch whilst saying nothing about length. (This one is open to abuse, but so are all signalling methods.)

Or you could tell the Committee that it's impossible to explain what they mean in a way that's understandable to the members, and recommend that they just do away with the rule entirely.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-September-24, 03:55

[barmar]

gnasher, on 2011-September-24, 02:59, said:

xamples of methods that are forbidden:
(1) A high odd card is encouraging and even; a low odd card is encouraging and odd; a high even card is discouraging and even; a low even card is discouraging and odd.

Huh? An odd card is even, and an even card is odd?

[gnasher]

barmar, on 2011-September-24, 22:12, said:

Huh? An odd card is even, and an even card is odd?

I meant "A high odd card encourages partner to continue the suit, and says that before playing this card the player had an even number of cards in the suit." Is that clearer?

Making similar changes to the rest of my examples is left as an exercise for the reader.