[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.

[jillybean]

akwoo, on 2025-March-05, 23:18, said:

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.

I think we do welcome less serious players, we don't cater for the new players who do want to become tournament players.

[mycroft]

How? (And remember that many tournament players don't want a serious sport either - witness the "if there's no Gold Rush, we're not coming that day" people, never mind the "whaddaya mean we're in A? But we only have 1500 points, it's not like we are experts" people).

But seriously, how does either the OP "when will this odd call that appeals to scientists and foreigners be legal?" or the thread drift "it's hard to understand or find the regulations explaining what can be played and how it should be explained" inhibit "new players" from becoming tournament players (or even "bridge-as-a-sport" players (*))? I am right with you on "M:tG players, who are used to complications far beyond bridge bidding science, and are also used to far stronger penalties for legal mistakes (sometimes even "forgets"), even at "low level" tournaments (treating "Regular" REL games like FNM as "club games" equivalent, and "Competitive" REL as "tournament"), might find the ways we rule and protect "this game" as "not serious", but we had the opportunity to go after those and we didn't/failed at it. The average new bridge player who takes their games "seriously" and gets deep into it? They might just RTFLB, like they did with the Rules of Golf back in the day, or the Laws of Box Lacrosse when the(y|ir kid) got past intro level, and the CCs and Alert Procedures are really no worse than their condo bylaws or employment contracts. The attitude of us longtimers ("we know how bridge is played, don't confuse us with the Laws and Regulations") doesn't help, I will admit.

(*) If you play any sport at more than kick-around level, you'll be expected to have read the actual rules (or have a coach that has and can explan them). You'll get whistled, even when you "didn't mean to" or "didn't know about". You'll take your lumps, or you'll read up and know for next time. Really, bridge is the only thing close to a sport where not knowing the rules you play under, even at the top level, is a badge of honour, never mind *possible*.

[mike777]

 mycroft, on 2025-March-06, 11:59, said:

How? (And remember that many tournament players don't want a serious sport either - witness the "if there's no Gold Rush, we're not coming that day" people, never mind the "whaddaya mean we're in A? But we only have 1500 points, it's not like we are experts" people).

But seriously, how does either the OP "when will this odd call that appeals to scientists and foreigners be legal?" or the thread drift "it's hard to understand or find the regulations explaining what can be played and how it should be explained" inhibit "new players" from becoming tournament players (or even "bridge-as-a-sport" players (*))? I am right with you on "M:tG players, who are used to complications far beyond bridge bidding science, and are also used to far stronger penalties for legal mistakes (sometimes even "forgets"), even at "low level" tournaments (treating "Regular" REL games like FNM as "club games" equivalent, and "Competitive" REL as "tournament"), might find the ways we rule and protect "this game" as "not serious", but we had the opportunity to go after those and we didn't/failed at it. The average new bridge player who takes their games "seriously" and gets deep into it? They might just RTFLB, like they did with the Rules of Golf back in the day, or the Laws of Box Lacrosse when the(y|ir kid) got past intro level, and the CCs and Alert Procedures are really no worse than their condo bylaws or employment contracts. The attitude of us longtimers ("we know how bridge is played, don't confuse us with the Laws and Regulations") doesn't help, I will admit.

(*) If you play any sport at more than kick-around level, you'll be expected to have read the actual rules (or have a coach that has and can explan them). You'll get whistled, even when you "didn't mean to" or "didn't know about". You'll take your lumps, or you'll read up and know for next time. Really, bridge is the only thing close to a sport where not knowing the rules you play under, even at the top level, is a badge of honour, never mind *possible*.

Strongly disagree.
The vast majority of professional sports players don't know many of the league rules. This is for several reasons.
Rules change often and careers are short.
These are adults with many things going on in their lives.