[jillybean]

barmar, on 2025-March-05, 15:02, said:

I agree with this. I also think most players have never read the Laws.

In general, people don't learn games by reading the rules, they learn by osmosis from other players.

And as you pointed out earlier, the majority of players in North America want a simple version of the game.

barmar, on 2025-February-27, 16:45, said:

The impression I get is that the ACBL regulators believe that American players don't want comprehensive, detailed regulations like the colored books. They probably consider them too overwhelming and no one will read them.

ACBL regulations have generally been based more on establishing some general principles, and then applying them to specific cases. The problem has been that these principles are sometimes too vague; they made some improvements in the revisions of the convention charts and alert procedures a few years ago. But the general idea of keeping them short and general instead of long and detailed is still there.

I'm not sure they're wrong about what the majority of ACBL members want.

[akwoo]

pescetom, on 2025-March-05, 16:47, said:

If (like me and my RA and even the IOC) you consider bridge a sport rather than a mere game, then your expectations must be a little higher.
The dumber people learn by osmosis but also by any instruction that is available and by interaction with the referee, the smarter people read the rules and try to ensure they are followed.
Those who seemingly never learn (or wonder only what they can get away with) are certainly not interested in participating in a sport.

If I want to play against bridge players who are interested in participating in a sport, I have to travel at a minimum about 500 km, as I did last weekend.

We have to welcome less serious players if we want a game at all.