Apply the laws online c.f. F2F
With the 2027 laws on the horizon, my mind has been exercised about the inherent differences between F2F and online play.
A classic example is a mistaken play. In F2F the phsical action of playing a card from Dummy is fundamentally different to playing one from hand. In online, it is essentially the same.
The laws allow dummy's unintended play to be corrected, but not declarer's. In F2F this seems sensible, in Online it is just inconsistent.
Different organisations have varying approaches when implementing this online. In EBU events, no undoes in the play are allowed at all (to my mind depriving Declarer of their rights under 45C4b). Other organisations allow full undoes (treating it as a dropped card).
I know this is an old issue that has been discussed before, and I do not wish to reginite that debate, but it does point to a need for differing rules online. Should we as a body be pushing this as an active issue, or even leading the charge?
Comments
In 2001, the WBFLC produced a set of Laws for Online bridge. They were virtually the same as the 1997 Laws. I don't seem to have kept a copy, nor of their Commentary that they produced at the time, but, as they invited feed-back, I did have correspondence with them as I was CTD for what was then the EBU Online Bridge Club (now BCL). I don't think the Online Laws were ever officially deemed defunct but certainly by the time the 2007 Laws came along, no one spoke of the Online Laws any more.
In Lockdown in 2020 when the EBU started games in Real Bridge and BBO, they produced the Light Blue Book of Regulations for online play (now included in the Blue Book) which very much followed those of BCL, but bearing in mind the different software
It seems to me that separate Laws for online bridge are not needed, but that each Regulating Authority should have its own Regulations that include how the Laws should be applied in their online games, given the vagaries of each platform's software.
Sadly it looks like I haven't kept my archives from 2001, which might have been of historic interest. One thing I can remember was being surprised that the WBFLC were surprised that we allowed defensive claims and concessions!
Barrie Partridge - CTD for Bridge Club Live
The lawbook does still somewhat anachronistically assume spoken bidding, although it allows for alternative forms of making bids. I suppose I see online platforms as similar to bidding boxes and screens, when you alter the mechanics of the game you have to consider how that affects the operation on the laws.
As Barry alludes to, there's some differences depending upon exactly which platform you're using so a single set of online laws isn't necessarily the best approach.
I think not allowing undos during the play is a pragmatic approach to the online situation, although I've never been a great fan of allowing a change of an unintended designation. It's hard to distinguish between a misspeak and a genuine change of mind, and online play is even trickier in this respect..