Trivia - How do you arrange your cards

[Pat]

It is traditional, when displaying a hand on media, be it newsgroup, travellers, handrecords or whatever to list the cards is descending order, ie AK864 etc.

I read numbers in increasing order, so instinctively arrange my cards 468KA, and have done so since I started playing some 50 years ago. At the table I can evaluate my hand almost instinctively, but on BBO I have to stop and think – my hand looks different (obviously).

I was googling for details of a convention the other day, and happened on a photo of a hand ordered in ascending order, so obviously there are others who handle their cards like I do.

I am just wondering how common or uncommon this is?

[Wes Powers]

I personally don't sort the cards within each suit. I know some players
don't sort their hands at all.

I know of one local player who sorts in descending order, except for the
left-most suit in his hand, which he sorts in ascending order.

Apart from these people, I think that everyone I've ever kibbitzed sorts
the cards in descending order.

Wes

[judyo...@gmail.com]

It is a good idea, advocated by Lawrence in a book, to avoid having important cards at either end of the fan.

Carl

[dake50]

I too ascend.
But always put clubs nearest my thumb. Superstitious that way.

[David Goldfarb]

In article <km68c7$flp$1...@dont-email.me>,

Wes Powers <wp5...@yahoo-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>I know of one local player who sorts in descending order, except for the
>left-most suit in his hand, which he sorts in ascending order.

I do that. I don't want anyone to see me pull the 9 from the leftmost
spot, and know that I have no higher card in that suit.

--
David Goldfarb |From the fortune cookie file:
goldf...@gmail.com |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |"You have at your command the wisdom of the ages."

[Douglas Newlands]

On 6/05/13 3:59 AM, Pat wrote:
> It is traditional, when displaying a hand on media, be it newsgroup, travellers,
>handrecords or whatever to list the cards is descending order, ie AK864 etc.
>
> I read numbers in increasing order, so instinctively arrange my cards 468KA,
>and have done so since I started playing some 50 years ago. At the table I can

>evaluate my hand almost instinctively, but on BBO I have to stop and think � my

>hand looks different (obviously).
>
> I was googling for details of a convention the other day, and happened on a
>photo of a hand ordered in ascending order, so obviously there are others who
>handle their cards like I do.
>
> I am just wondering how common or uncommon this is?

When teaching post beginner classes, I suggest they sort their hand
with the correct count card at the right hand end of each suit so
that they can subsequently pull the correct count card in tempo.

The only downside of this is that it has to be done surreptitiously
to avoid giving info to a declarer who notices (or listens!) whether
you shift one card or three cards.

doug

[derek]

On Monday, May 6, 2013 12:03:04 AM UTC-3, Douglas, wrote:
>
> When teaching post beginner classes, I suggest they sort their hand
> with the correct count card at the right hand end of each suit so
> that they can subsequently pull the correct count card in tempo.

Yes, I hit on that by myself when I was having trouble getting my signals straight when I was first learning to signal. I don't bother any more, now that I can usually figure out what I'll be playing before the lead is played to a trick.

> The only downside of this is that it has to be done surreptitiously
> to avoid giving info to a declarer who notices (or listens!) whether
> you shift one card or three cards.

Not really. You'd have to be way smarter than the average bear to know what cards are being moved where, if the sorting is all done before you start bidding (I'd only move one card per suit, anyway - but it involves no more sorting to arrange the cards K962 or K926).

[ttw...@att.net]

I don't sort the cards at all. I did have an opponent complain to me
about it. I asked why he was looking at my hand. It doesn't take much
work to play without sorting cards. Playing gin helps.

[vsp...@hotmail.com]

I'm older than the average age for ACBL members.
Not sorting cards isn't an option. I don't sort
the suits. Suits are whatever order they occurred
when the cards were removed from the board.

[Stu Goodgold]

I sort my hand when there is a lull in the bidding, and I sort in descending order, alternating colors. If I am dealer I always bid before sorting. It seems easier to find the card you intend to play if the hand is sorted.
As for giving away top and bottom of a suit, that is not a problem; I play with my hand below the table level most of the time (except when getting tired).

-Stu Goodgold
San Jose, CA

[Douglas Newlands]

Every hand has either 3 even length and 1 odd length suit or 1 even and
3 odd.
If it is 3 odd and 1 even
if you play natural count, you move 1 spot in the 1 even suit
if you play reverse count, you move a spot card in the 3 odd suits
If it is 3 even and 1 odd
if you play natural count, you move a spot in the 3 even suits
if you play reverse count, you move a spot card in the odd suit

It's like one part of Vinje signals!

doug

[derek]

OK, I see your point - I thought you were talking about moving three cards in one suit - but it _still_ isn't something that your opponents need to ever see. I start (I hope) with a sorted suit, so I move cards all over the place: nobody can tell whether, when I end up with four cards together, they were K962 or K926 - or even that it's not 96 and two cards from other suits.

[france...@googlemail.com]

On Sunday, May 5, 2013 6:59:52 PM UTC+1, Pat wrote:
> It is traditional, when displaying a hand on media, be it newsgroup, travellers, handrecords or whatever to list the cards is descending order, ie AK864 etc. I read numbers in increasing order, so instinctively arrange my cards 468KA, and have done so since I started playing some 50 years ago. At the table I can evaluate my hand almost instinctively, but on BBO I have to stop and think – my hand looks different (obviously). I was googling for details of a convention the other day, and happened on a photo of a hand ordered in ascending order, so obviously there are others who handle their cards like I do. I am just wondering how common or uncommon this is?

I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.

[Stu Goodgold]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote:

>
> I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.

I wonder if anyone has actually seen an opponent watching where you pull a card from your hand, especially at the higher levels of play.

[Bertil]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 1:39:02 PM UTC-4, Stu Goodgold wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> > I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.
>
>

In the ACBL Laws there is a section about Conduct and Etiquette, where it's stated in f) looking at another player's hand as for the purpose of observing
the place from which he draws a card.

What kind of players do you play against?

Stig

[Stu Goodgold]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 3:09:00 PM UTC-7, Bertil wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 1:39:02 PM UTC-4, Stu Goodgold wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> In the ACBL Laws there is a section about Conduct and Etiquette, where it's stated in f) looking at another player's hand as for the purpose of observing
>
> the place from which he draws a card.
>
>
>
> What kind of players do you play against?

I know the ethics laws and I am sure Frances does also. plus she is a top level expert. That is why I am asking her and others if they have ever experienced players who study the backs of your cards.

[Douglas Newlands]

There used to be a pair in Melbourne who had played at international
level who both watched where opponents pulled cards from.
This was quite well known amongst better players and you kept
your cards below the table when playing against them.
Having said that, I think this is fairly rare since it is the only
example I can think of.

doug

[Charles Brenner]

My left hand opponent was a lesser pro, playing in 6S and missing
Qxx,x of trumps. Home money IMP game for meaningful stakes. Dummy held
AJxx. He started with the K from hand; all followed small. Fourth to
play I played my singleton second from the end and it sure looked like
he was watching. That was somewhat confirmed as, with the contract on
the line, he rather quickly continued with low to the ace for down
one. In fact the dummy afterwards asked why, at so important a
juncture, he hadn't taken some time about the play. But I enjoyed
defending him, saying I'm sure he figured out this position long ago
and had nothing new to think about. Of course I privately meant that
he'd long been watching where cards are pulled from.

The game was strong but I wouldn't say high level. To the extent that
I know top players well enough to have an opinion I think the higher
the level the more scrupulous the behavior.

[Steve Willner]

On 2013-05-05 11:03 PM, Douglas Newlands wrote:
> When teaching post beginner classes, I suggest they sort their hand
> with the correct count card at the right hand end of each suit so
> that they can subsequently pull the correct count card in tempo.

It's fine to do that on the initial sort, at least if they aren't
obtrusive about it. However, I hope you are teaching them never to
resort their hand once play is underway. Doing that against any decent
player gives away a lot of information.

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 swil...@nhcc.net
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA

[france...@googlemail.com]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 6:39:02 PM UTC+1, Stu Goodgold wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote: > > I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from. I wonder if anyone has actually seen an opponent watching where you pull a card from your hand, especially at the higher levels of play. -Stu Goodgold San Jose, CA

I know of a small number of players who are suspected of doing do (and one expert I am certain who does). I have also heard various accusations, but it's not always possible to tell what is table feel, what is cheating and what is simply great play.

I consider not sorting as insurance. Once you are alerted to this, you might notice a lot of (expert) opponents quietly sorting their hand properly just before putting dummy down.

I was convinced not to sort by my partner after (during a couple of boards against some friends) he told me what he could tell about my hand after watching how I played each card.

[france...@googlemail.com]

" To the extent that I know top players well enough to have an opinion I think the higher the level the more scrupulous the behavior."

This sets me off on one of my hobby-horses.
In all sports there is (often) a belief that the absolutely top players are somehow better, more scrupulous, more sportsmanlike and somehow generally nicer than those lower down the tree. That's why it seems all the more shocking when Lance Armstrong (say) is found to have been a cheat or when Oscar Pistorius makes very ungracious remarks having been beaten in the 400m(?) at the paralympics, or when Tiger Woods turns out to be serially unfaithful.

I think people are people however good or bad they are at one particular game or sport. At every level you will find those famous for their ethics and good behaviour, those who are actively unpleasant or cheat or defraud their clients* or beat their wives and the majority sitting somewhere in the middle.

Top players tend to _appear_ to be better behaved for two reasons
- If they are pros, they generally can't afford a dodgy reputation. Even more so in major money sports when corporate sponsors will back out very fast after adverse publicity.

- They generally know the rules better. In bridge you get fewer blatant breaches of the UI laws (for example) from experts because they already know what is illegal and will get ruled against. Cheating or unethical behaviour is more subtle and not everyone will spot it. Your local keen golfer might regularly move his ball to a better lie when no-one is watching, but if he's on TV to a global audience that isn't going to happen.

*yes I know one bridge pro who has done this

[judyo...@gmail.com]

Once in the mid '70s, I kibitzed Roth in the 1st rd of the Goldman Pairs.

On most deals, he created a fake singleton at one edge or the other.

Carl

[derek]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 7:09:00 PM UTC-3, Bertil wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 1:39:02 PM UTC-4, Stu Goodgold wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.
> >
> In the ACBL Laws there is a section about Conduct and Etiquette, where it's stated in f) looking at another player's hand as for the purpose of observing
> the place from which he draws a card.
>
> What kind of players do you play against?

a) Generally speaking, not ACBL ones, and
b) Who said they actually _try_ to observe? People don't have to try to see what you're doing to notice if you pull a card from either end of your hand. An ethical player does what they can to ensure that nobody (that includes your partner) gains unauthorized information either intentionally or otherwise.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 6:09:00 PM UTC-4, Bertil wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 1:39:02 PM UTC-4, Stu Goodgold wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:55:01 AM UTC-7, france...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> In the ACBL Laws there is a section about Conduct and Etiquette, where it's stated in f) looking at another player's hand as for the purpose of observing
>

That is from the laws of contract bridge, not anything specific to acbl

[sofos]

On Sunday, May 5, 2013 10:59:52 AM UTC-7, Pat wrote:

Many years ago I was playing in a regional Swiss with a rather well known expert partner who is no longer with us. We played against a pro-client pair and after the match which we won, primarily because my partner guessed a 3-1 trump split missing the queen, he was accused of having "clocked" (the expression the opponents used) the queen which happened to be in the hands of the expert of the opposing pair. I have no idea whether the singleton that the other player had was held at the extreme right or left of her hand or not. Obviously her partner and expert teammates must have known something about how she sorted her hand.
Another, perhaps apocryphal, story about hand-sorting and trump queens is told about another also departed LA area player who supposedly playing against a "sharp eyed" opponent managed to put the trump queen in his shirt pocket and the remaining trump at the extreme right of his hand. When declarer having observed where the small trump had been pulled from took a second round finesse
the Queen made an appearance out of the shirt pocket.

[Charles Brenner]

Good and interesting insights. I only don't understand the distinction
you are trying to underline with "_appear_". Maybe it depends on the
definition of "scrupulous." I used the word with the idea of careful
adherence to the rules and proper behavior, not requiring that the
motivating scruples are necessarily admirable motives. But I
appreciate your idea that maybe some of these well-behaved experts are
putting on a virtuous front.

[Douglas Newlands]

One thing that worries me about pros is their apparent attitude to
looking at opponents' cards when they are held less than carefully.
I have spoken to two about it in the last 2 years and they had
essentially the same response that they would warn opponents once
and thereafter just look.
I know I am generalising wildly from two observations but their
similarity perhaps justifies this in some way.
I find the idea expressed discomforting at the very least but
maybe they think I am naive.

Mind you, I have some other acquaintances of much lower ability who,
when you sit at the other side of the table from them, can be seen
to be peeking or trying to peek.
Lacking intestinal fortitude, I just try to not play with them rather
than confronting the issue. How _do_ you confront?
Still, such problems of minor(?) cheating seem to occur at all levels
of the game as Frances suggests.

doug

[Charles Brenner]

On May 10, 10:49 pm, Douglas Newlands <douglas.newla...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I think -- as a known non-expert on the rules -- that looking at an
opponent's cards is optional as long as you make no effort to do so.
(The definition of "effort" may be a matter of custom but surely
craning your neck is an effort.) Assuming that's correct even one
warning is more than required. Last time I encountered the situation I
realized after asking my opponent to hold his cards up that he could
not -- he had a degenerative muscular condition -- and I managed not
to look. But it's something of an effort when the cards are blatantly
exposed, so it does seem to me it would be unfair if an opponent were
entitled to require that effort of you.

By confronting I guess you mean your partner. (If an opponent is
looking of course you can just take responsibility for yourself.) One
idea: warn the opponents, i.e. gently advise them of Ida Mae
Thompson's rule to sit far enough back that their knees clear the
table.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

I think the proper distinction is between looking and seeing.

You are entitled to see an opponent's hand if it is held carelessly enough, say, that the spade king is visible out of the corner of your eye.

The laws of contract bridge forbid you for looking at an opponent's hand on the off chance that a card may be flashed.

Carl

[derek]

On Saturday, May 11, 2013 2:49:18 AM UTC-3, Douglas, wrote:
>
> One thing that worries me about pros is their apparent attitude to
> looking at opponents' cards when they are held less than carefully.
> I have spoken to two about it in the last 2 years and they had
> essentially the same response that they would warn opponents once
> and thereafter just look.
>
> I know I am generalising wildly from two observations but their
> similarity perhaps justifies this in some way.
>
> I find the idea expressed discomforting at the very least but
> maybe they think I am naive.

Probably, they do. They, however, are violating the law if they really do that, so talk to your director. If you _are_ the director, promise disciplinary penalties if you catch them at it again.

[Blind Broccoli]

On 5/8/2013 12:55 PM, france...@googlemail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, May 5, 2013 6:59:52 PM UTC+1, Pat wrote:

>> It is traditional, when displaying a hand on media, be it newsgroup, travellers, handrecords or whatever to list the cards is descending order, ie AK864 etc. I read numbers in increasing order, so instinctively arrange my cards 468KA, and have done so since I started playing some 50 years ago. At the table I can evaluate my hand almost instinctively, but on BBO I have to stop and think � my hand looks different (obviously). I was googling for details of a convention the other day, and happened on a photo of a hand ordered in ascending order, so obviously there are others who handle their cards like I do. I am just wondering how common or uncommon this is?

>
> I sort suits, but don't sort within a suit. Too easy for opponents to see where you pull a card from.
>

A late partner of mine always moved his cards around so that he appeared
to be sorting his hand. However if you looked at his hand you'd see that
the cards were arranged totally at random. He had a lot of rubber bridge
experience and a suspicious mind. :)

BB

[ttw...@att.net]

On a partially related topic. When I was teaching, I would sit in on
Spades games now and then. Some of the players would show cards to
each other. Of course, both my partner and I would notice the card
shown too. Finally, one of my students asked me why I didn't call the
opponents out for cheating. I pointed out that, in general, I could
make more use of the knowledge the card's location than the opponents
could. Mostly these opponents exposed aces and kings. It's easier to
count and opponent's hand (partner's too) when the location of a few
significant cards is known. It's like having your own Purple Decoder.

[Steve Willner]

On 2013-05-10 11:17 PM, sofos wrote:
> Another, perhaps apocryphal, story about hand-sorting and trump
> queens is told about another also departed LA area player who
> supposedly playing against a "sharp eyed" opponent managed to put the
> trump queen in his shirt pocket and the remaining trump at the
> extreme right of his hand. When declarer having observed where the
> small trump had been pulled from took a second round finesse the
> Queen made an appearance out of the shirt pocket.

Good story! It seems one could achieve the same effect by putting Qx at
the right with the x being last. Maybe not a bad strategy in general.
Alternatively, put a singleton as the next to last card in one's hand
(splitting another suit if necessary).

[dake50]

When teaching post beginner classes, I suggest they sort their hand
with the correct count card at the right hand end of each suit so
that they can subsequently pull the correct count card in tempo.
Yes, I hit on that by myself when I was having trouble getting my signals
straight when I was first learning to signal. I don't bother any more, now
that I can usually figure out what I'll be playing before the lead is played to a trick.

*** Similarly, I would anticipate which signal I later will play and move them to the right end of that suit. Essentially getting my signals ready before the crunch time to play them. Helped keep me from missing our agreed card (like,count,suit preference).

*** Also I don't keep my hand fanned in the play. I can slide to the card's index under my thumb. That helps keep me aware of the play, not looking into my fanned hand, but noting the trick before me.

[dake50]

You are entitled to see an opponent's hand if it is held carelessly enough, say, that the spade king is visible out of the corner of your eye.

*** Can that hand now have exposed cards?? Wow, try to make that ruling as director.
"But he has S:K97 H:1084 ... " so they are exposed.

[Stu Goodgold]

Of course they are not exposed. A defender's card must be held in a way that his partner could have seen it to be an exposed card. If declarer got just a peek at an opponent's holding, it is almost certain the other defender could not see it.

Declarer's hand does not have any penalty associated with an exposed card.