[BudH]

I was asked about these following practices recently and whether they are within the Law 40C4(a) restrictions on memory aides:

1. Dummy always puts the opening led suit to his far left (if not trump).
2. Dummy always faces his longest suit to his far left if not trumps.
3. Dummy (only) in notrump contracts does not alternate suit colors when facing dummy's cards. (to help declarer remember it's a notrump contract, possibly without declarer ever asking him to do this).
4. Declarer always calls for the lowest honor of a sequence to help him remember which cards are good.
5. Declarer specifies to dummy which order of suits to use to match the order in his hand.

You can specify if it matters if the partnership had discussed any of these either before the session or before the auction.

[helene_t]

1 is not ok
4 is ok
The others I am not sure about

[gwnn]

6. Dummy puts his long major suit (or the major in which there is a known fit but was rejected) on his far left if they are playing NT.

[campboy]

I don't see why any of these are a problem with regards to Law 40C3a. That law only covers things that you aren't otherwise permitted to use as an aid to memory, such as taking notes. Using your cards as an aid to memory is permitted; that's why you're allowed to look at them and don't have to remember what cards you hold. The only difference between declarer using the order of his own cards to remind him (say) what the opening lead was, and using dummy's cards, is that the latter may be (is, IMO) a violation of law 43A1c.

Now 43A1c only applies to information about the play. So information about the auction (what the contract is) is not covered. Therefore I think 3 is permitted, since it only gives information about the contract. Indeed, we know that putting dummy down so as to communicate information about what trumps are cannot be prohibited by law 43, since it is required (when there are trumps) by Law 41. I agree with Helene about 1 and 4.

[steve2005]

helene_t, on 2015-April-24, 00:53, said:

1 is not ok
4 is ok
The others I am not sure about

Anything ok, declarer can always ask dummy to arrange suits in any order he wants (but trump has to go on declarer left).and can play any card he wants if that also helps he remember so what.

Memory aids would be like writing down cards played.

[blackshoe]

campboy, on 2015-April-24, 03:31, said:

I don't see why any of these are a problem with regards to Law 40C3a. That law only covers things that you aren't otherwise permitted to use as an aid to memory, such as taking notes.

That seems a rather restrictive interpretation of the word "any" ("…any aids to his memory…") in Law 40C3a.

campboy, on 2015-April-24, 03:31, said:

The only difference between declarer using the order of his own cards to remind him (say) what the opening lead was, and using dummy's cards, is that the latter may be (is, IMO) a violation of law 43A1c.

Now 43A1c only applies to information about the play. So information about the auction (what the contract is) is not covered. Therefore I think 3 is permitted, since it only gives information about the contract. Indeed, we know that putting dummy down so as to communicate information about what trumps are cannot be prohibited by law 43, since it is required (when there are trumps) by Law 41. I agree with Helene about 1 and 4.

Quote

Law 41C: …After it is too late to have previous calls restated (see B above), declarer or either defender, at his own* turn to play, is entitled to be informed as to what the contract is and whether, but not by whom, it was doubled or redoubled."

*Declarer may inquire at his turn to play from dummy or from his own hand.

Quote

Law 73B2: The gravest possible offense is for a partnership to exchange information through prearranged methods of communication other than those sanctioned by these Laws.

My take:
1. Not okay.
2. Okay.
3. Not okay.
4. Okay.
5. Okay.

6. Okay.

[sanst]

steve2005, on 2015-April-24, 07:05, said:

Anything ok, declarer can always ask dummy to arrange suits in any order he wants (but trump has to go on declarer left).and can play any card he wants if that also helps he remember so what.

Based on what law? Law 41D states that the dummy arranges his cards, not that the declarer can decide how they should be arranged.
As far as I can see this is a grey area in the laws, but my gut feeling is that most of the mehods mentioned are not allowed, at least not in Holland. The RA's can obviously regulate this; the Dutch bridge union allows players to have a note with contract, declarer, result, score and opening lead, but players must make sure that these can't be seen by those who still have to play that board. Any other memory aids are explicitly forbidden.

[blackshoe]

Private scores are supposed to be private, sure. I would submit that whether a written notation of the contract or opening lead is an "aid to memory" in the legal sense depends on when it's written. If after the hand is over, it's not. If after the auction is over and, respectively, after the lead is faced, then it could be.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-April-24, 12:36, said:

Private scores are supposed to be private, sure. I would submit that whether a written notation of the contract or opening lead is an "aid to memory" in the legal sense depends on when it's written. If after the hand is over, it's not. If after the auction is over and, respectively, after the lead is faced, then it could be.

Yes, if these "notes" are visible to a player during the play of a hand, they are definitely illegal.

[mycroft]

I will cop to one or two of these - certainly if I'm dropping ♠KT954 and a stiff into 3NT on a transfer auction, spades are not going to be on declarer's left. With very few exceptions like these, dummy is <trump>SHDC at all times (see below for why) for me, and I never notice what partner does the few times she lets me play the hand.

Having an agreement to do much of any of this is bad - especially 1 and 3.

If Declarer's wishes for arrangement of dummy (if legal arrangements, of course) are not okay, then what of my two partners, one of whom for visibility reasons requires "trumps on left, then SHDC" for dummy ALWAYS (and yeah, I wince when I have the above auction with him :-) and another where the colours ALWAYS have to alternate. I can't imagine this being wrong; but I wonder what happens if Declarer requests a special arrangement on every hand.

As far as notes on the card - I think if you write it all down while you are allowed to be reminded of the information, it should be good. If you look at it after that, I will ask to review your convention card until the hand's over :-) I go through periods where I write the entire auction down before the OL. Not as a memory aid during the hand - but in the bar.

[aguahombre]

Going with 1 & 3 not okay..as did Ed.

And (7) o.k. --- if the contract is Notrump, never put on Dummy's far right a suit bid by Declarer, so he won't get confused and think it is trump.

[Vampyr]

mycroft, on 2015-April-24, 17:42, said:

If you look at it after that, I will ask to review your convention card until the hand's over :-)

You can take possession of the opponents' convention card, and actually should have had it already, but I don't really see how you can take away the opponents' scorecard.

Of course you can always ask what the contract is, and I am sure that the poster above didn't mean to give the impression that players are allowed to look up the opening lead during the play of the hand.

[lamford]

In addition to memory aids there are potential aids to technique. One often has to do something 50% of the time, playing touching honours, say queen or jack, half the time being an example, but sometimes one needs to do something a different percentage of the time in a game theory situation. I presume that looking at a clock and playing the queen if the minute hand is in one half but the jack if it is in the other half is illegal, but what about looking at the colour of the QJ and playing the queen if it is red and the jack if is black, as I do? Am I breaching 40C3(a) in using colour as an aid to technique?

As an aside, I have noticed that around 70% of players select the higher honour in restricted choice situations. If they go over 67%, or below 33%, the declarer can do "better than suitplay" if he or she discerns this.

[BudH]

From the ACBL Rulings FAQ on "Use of Memory Aids" (September, 2013) at http://www.acbl.org/...of-memory-aids/ :

"Law 40 includes this provision:

3. (a) unless permitted by the Regulating Authority*, a player is not entitled during the auction and play periods to any aids to his memory, calculation or technique.

Items that would fall in these categories include:

Taking notes or writing down the auction and referring to it during the play
Writing down one’s complete hand and referring to it during the play
Placing opening leader’s first led suit to the far left of Dummy
Arranging played tricks in some other way than allowed by law to assist in recognizing who won the trick or how many tricks must still be taken to set or make the contract
Placing a finger on the table to consistently remind Declarer when he should be leading from Dummy rather than from his hand.
Referring to one’s own convention card at any time during the auction or play of the hand."

*A club serves as its own Regulating Authority, whether it be in the form of a Board, an Owner, or Club Manager.
**********************************************
Also, from Australia/New Zealand, http://www.abfevents...InRegGuid11.pdf, this is from their interpretations and allowed law options document:

"Law 16A1(d) - This law allows the player use of his memory of information in the laws and regulations. It does not authorize him to look during the auction and play at the printed regulations, the law book, anyone’s scorecard, or the backs of the bidding cards – all of which are classed as aids to memory [Law 40C3(a)]."
**********************************************
The Australia/New Zealand information above is echoed in the minutes of the WBF Laws Committee Meeting on 10 October 2008 in Beijing (bottom of page 4 at http://www.qldbridge...ee10oct2008.pdf):

"LAW 16 and others – concerning information rights

16A1(d) allows the player use of his memory of information in the laws and regulations. It does not authorize him to look during the auction and play at the printed regulations, the law book, or anyone’s scorecard or the backs of bidding cards etc. as (Law 40C3(a)) an aid to memory."

[BudH]

I admit I have referred to my private scorecard after the auction period has begun - but only to check on the vulnerability conditions for the board being played! I have played in some ACBL events where there were not red vulnerability inserts in the board pockets to denote a side vulnerable and having some mild red-green color blindness, it was difficult to distinguish easily the red and green color on the sticker that included the board number and vulnerability.

Yes, I try to remember to do this BEFORE anyone removes cards from the board. But occasionally I forget.

Perhaps someone could say I have effectively looked at what is in the law book (vulnerability condition for each board number)!

[barmar]

I don't think any technique to determine the dealer and vulnerability of the current board should be a problem, since that's supposed to be displayed clearly on the board. If it's not as clear as it should be, I can't imagine that looking elsewhere for the same information would be a violation. No one is expected to have memorized the progression of vulnerabilities, so it's not a memory aid.

[sanst]

BudH, on 2015-April-25, 04:56, said:

I admit I have referred to my private scorecard after the auction period has begun - but only to check on the vulnerability conditions for the board being played! I have played in some ACBL events where there were not red vulnerability inserts in the board pockets to denote a side vulnerable and having some mild red-green color blindness, it was difficult to distinguish easily the red and green color on the sticker that ncluded the board number and vulnerability

OT: In our club with not yet 100 members we have more than one colour blind player, one of these absolutely can't see the difference between red and green. He must ask the others at the table what the vulnerability is. It seems to be impossible to buy white and red stickers, and to make these myself, is beyond me and the means I have. Why do all the board manfacturers use those green and red ones?

[blackshoe]

Vampyr, on 2015-April-24, 20:19, said:

You can take possession of the opponents' convention card, and actually should have had it already, but I don't really see how you can take away the opponents' scorecard.

Of course you can always ask what the contract is, and I am sure that the poster above didn't mean to give the impression that players are allowed to look up the opening lead during the play of the hand.

In the ACBL, the "private score" is often on the back of the convention card — or the other way 'round, as Alex Groner wrote in 1956 ("You can even write your conventions on the back of your scorecard!"). Also most folks here are extremely reluctant to give up their system card, even if they have it on the table, for more than a few seconds — if that. In fact, most folks here seem to view the idea of exchanging cards at the beginning of the round, and keeping opponent's card, as he keeps your own, for the entire round, to be seriously bizarre.

[blackshoe]

Bud,

As Joost says, you can ask before you (and technically, your partner, but I don't think that will cause a problem, unless Lamford's SB is one of your opponents) take your cards out of the board.

Joost,

Why? "Because we've always done it that way."

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-April-25, 10:46, said:

In the ACBL, the "private score" is often on the back of the convention card — or the other way 'round, as Alex Groner wrote in 1956 ("You can even write your conventions on the back of your scorecard!"). Also most folks here are extremely reluctant to give up their system card, even if they have it on the table, for more than a few seconds — if that. In fact, most folks here seem to view the idea of exchanging cards at the beginning of the round, and keeping opponent's card, as he keeps your own, for the entire round, to be seriously bizarre.

Yes, I am aware of this, but in most places the scorecard and CC are separate. So while Mycroft's solution would work in one single NO, it would not work elsewhere. Of course, the scorecard on the back of the CC situation does make the proper exchange of CCs a bit problematic, since a player will want his card after each hand to write down the score.

Except in clubs that have upgraded to Bridgemate 2; then you can just get all the scores at the end of the round.