[barmar]

The OP said they returned "unaware". If they were able to see what happened while they were "rushing", they wouldn't be unaware, unless you think this was just an assumption on the other players' parts that Fluffy was reporting.

Maybe that's the point of the question -- do you have to assume the worst, that the player was somehow able to observe the proceedings at the table while they were rushing to the toilet? But it couldn't have been very much of a rush if they were able to observe a "long tank".

[Zelandakh]

I simply thought we had dealt with the primary scenario and thought it worthwhile to speculate a little on alternatives, aka thread drift. It is not so uncommon for facts to be reported one way from one perspective and another sees things completely differently either, so it could even be that a report of an incident where a player was "unaware" turns out to be quite different later on when additional facts come to light.

[gwnn]

I think it's totally fine to do it Zel in abstract, but in this case I'm afraid you don't have a lot to work with. What I'd be more afraid of is seeing people's cards while the player gets up, myself, rather than detecting tempo issues from a short glance from a distance. All this is assuming that the player did in fact go to the bathroom and he didn't have to wait outside to get in - in that case I think many people would instinctively look at the table they just left (e.g., to see if the other three people are angry at him or whatever).

[Vampyr]

gwnn, on 2016-May-19, 10:32, said:

I think it's totally fine to do it Zel in abstract, but in this case I'm afraid you don't have a lot to work with. What I'd be more afraid of is seeing people's cards while the player gets up, myself, rather than detecting tempo issues from a short glance from a distance. All this is assuming that the player did in fact go to the bathroom and he didn't have to wait outside to get in - in that case I think many people would instinctively look at the table they just left (e.g., to see if the other three people are angry at him or whatever).

I think it would be rare for a single-person lavatory to open directly from the playing room.

[gwnn]

Vampyr, on 2016-May-19, 10:37, said:

I think it would be rare for a single-person lavatory to open directly from the playing room.

I agree. Just trying to make sense of this thread.

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2016-May-19, 10:37, said:

I think it would be rare for a single-person lavatory to open directly from the playing room.

They are often in a central area with glass to the playing room(s) though. A similar thing could happen, for example, on a smoke break where the table is visible through windows from the smoking area.

[Zelandakh]

gwnn, on 2016-May-19, 10:32, said:

I think it's totally fine to do it Zel in abstract, but in this case I'm afraid you don't have a lot to work with.

Hey, I've brought home contracts before now with less to work with!

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2016-May-19, 10:46, said:

They are often in a central area with glass to the playing room(s) though. A similar thing could happen, for example, on a smoke break where the table is visible through windows from the smoking area.

Trying hard to picture this first.

As for the smoke break, well you would be dummy or the round would be finished. I am familiar with the feeling of being desperate for a cigarette, but I don't know of anyone who has been so desperate that they have gone for a fag in the middle of an auction.

[barmar]

Vampyr, on 2016-May-19, 10:37, said:

I think it would be rare for a single-person lavatory to open directly from the playing room.

It's pretty close at the Westwood Duplicate Bridge club. There's are men's and ladie's rooms in a very short hallway right off the playing room, and the refreshment table is right next to it. So if you have to wait for the restroom you're likely to stand by the refreshment table in the room.

[Fluffy]

gwnn, on 2016-May-19, 02:46, said:

So in what conceivable universe could there be UI, or AI, or any "I" other than the auction so far and (perhaps less relevant to bridge) some bathroom notes he read carved on the wall? I am guessing that you got a terrible ruling and you are doing a sanity check?

There was nothing really important the toilet player passed in a flash, it was surprising to me someone would get advantage because he was away from the table, it is like I could avoid getting UI problems by closing my eyes till it is my turn again. On some ocasions it might be worth trying.

[gwnn]

Why was it surprising to you? What did you expect the TD to do, should he assume that your opponent can see through walls?

[Fluffy]

TD was never called.

[barmar]

Fluffy, on 2016-June-06, 09:56, said:

There was nothing really important the toilet player passed in a flash, it was surprising to me someone would get advantage because he was away from the table, it is like I could avoid getting UI problems by closing my eyes till it is my turn again. On some ocasions it might be worth trying.

If someone drops a card on the floor, I avert my eyes to avoid the possibility of seeing it while they pick it up.

[gwnn]

Fluffy, on 2016-June-06, 19:31, said:

TD was never called.

OK, sorry, I was jumping to conclusions. But what would you expect a hypothetical TD to say if he had been summoned?

GG: "OK my LHO went to the toilet and my RHO tanked and then bid. Does he have UI?"
TD: "Did he see the tank while he went to the toilet?"
GG: "No."
TD: "Did he overhear anything?"
GG: "No."
TD: "Did he see any cards while he was standing up or sitting down?"
GG: "No."
TD: "Does he have ESP or X-ray vision?"
GG: "I guess not."

Would you be upset if the TD just left the table now? What would you expect him to rule? Sorry if I am seeming hostile, I just honestly don't get this thread. I am trying to understand what your point of view is, or what you think the law/procedure should be.

If you are saying that players could get some sort of advantage (or, more precisely, lack of disadvantage) from going to the toilet, yes. But of course we will not allow people to go to the toilet between every round of a competitive auction. Even if some medical condition were to necessitate this (several bathroom breaks per board), I expect even the friendliest club in the world would soon invite the player in question to just get themselves treated or to look into online bridge.

[Fluffy]

You don't get the point of the thread I guess. Now I know I can avoid UI from partner leaving the table, don't think I will ever be able to use this tactic, perhaps if I ever do a fake invitational bid I Can avoid UI trouble by going to toilet, I don't know.

[gwnn]

Are you talking about something like
1H-3C* (Bergen, 6-9 with 4 hearts)
3H-4H
on some hand a little too strong than a preemptive 4H bid (where a slow 3H might have prevented him from bidding 4H)? Yes, responder would have some sort of lack of disadvantage if he went to the toilet and came back in 3 minutes. No, he could not get away with it more than two or three times in the same club. He would have to be a very good actor to convince everybody at the table that he *really needs to* go right in the middle of an auction. He would need to rush out, wait 15 seconds in the bathroom, come back, apologize, and then bid 4H. Wouldn't his life be easier if he had just bid 2NT or 4H instead?

Yes I understand what you are trying to imply. But it's just not a practical form of cheating.

[pran]

Fluffy, on 2016-June-07, 03:00, said:

You don't get the point of the thread I guess. Now I know I can avoid UI from partner leaving the table, don't think I will ever be able to use this tactic, perhaps if I ever do a fake invitational bid I Can avoid UI trouble by going to toilet, I don't know.

Well, if you establish a pattern of going to the toilet in certain situations you definitely violate Law 73A/B by signaling to your partner that this is such a situation!

[gordontd]

Fluffy, on 2016-June-07, 03:00, said:

You don't get the point of the thread I guess. Now I know I can avoid UI from partner leaving the table, don't think I will ever be able to use this tactic, perhaps if I ever do a fake invitational bid I Can avoid UI trouble by going to toilet, I don't know.

Since you don't know you are going to get UI until you already have it, you can hardly mitigate it by leaving the table unless you leave the table after every call!

[blackshoe]

gwnn, on 2016-June-07, 01:58, said:

OK, sorry, I was jumping to conclusions. But what would you expect a hypothetical TD to say if he had been summoned?

GG: "OK my LHO went to the toilet and my RHO tanked and then bid. Does he have UI?"
[snip]

Would you be upset if the TD just left the table now? What would you expect him to rule?

I would expect him to rule on the question he was asked: "does my opponent have UI?" The answer is no. I would expect the TD to say so.

[gwnn]

Fair enough. I was imagining him walking away slowly with a blank look. Maybe I'm not used to what TD's have to face on a daily basis.