Hacker News Reader

Comment by joeframbach | Hacker News Reader

If people are just expected to be human state machines and are penalized for not doing the prescribed automata, then you might as well flip a coin for the trophy and skip the game.

This is like saying a catcher can't signal to a pitcher.

Information-passing is a human skill that adds a dimension to the game. Let the best win.

View on HN

Yeah, I lost all interest in Bridge when I found out the people who play it hate 100% of the interesting parts and had outlawed them, and that every time someone comes up with another cool approach, they outlaw that, too.

Initially learning the game it was like “oh wow, that feature of the game has some really cool implications! This is amazing!” but then reading about how real bridge tournaments run, yeah, they crafted the rules to remove every single one of those cool implications.

[EDIT] to be fair, the basic rules would also result in a terrible game as soon as people got too good at exploiting them. I just think they’ve managed to find another way to ruin the game while keeping it technically playable.

The extent to which this just seems to be openly true is startling. Some games, in response to new strategies that are particularly effective, by embracing them and setting aside older approaches. Some games respond by rebalancing and changing rules to keep the game working well. Bridge just bans the strategies themselves (eg, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_pass and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_unusual_method ).

Strong Pass there's very good reasons to outlaw. It is simply too destructive a method to yield an interesting game.

HUMs also tend to end up being very destructive to the opponents, because they really don't understand the full implications of the bid. And may not have discussed how to bid over it. Heck I've run into this with people playing over a strong club system, and they haven't discussed what 2C means.

In the end... many games end up with a few rules to make them interesting. I will not defend the ACBL here, I think the WBC is pretty much on the mark last I watched.

> Information-passing is a human skill that adds a dimension to the game.

Nah. You choose the game that you prefer. You can play the game where you cheat all the time, but don't play it with people who like bridge without asking them first.

Bridge has a built in channel for communication that has very limited bandwidth. The bidding conventions are about maximizing how much you communicate with limited symbols and almost no attempt at secrecy. Effectively it'd turn the game into one where players play with their hands face up, because that's the most effective way to communicate. That doesn't sound very interesting to me.

If you want to invent a version of bridge where surreptitious information-passing is part of the game, more power to you, but it’s not the same game.

Quite untrue.

There is this thing called "Bridge Judgement" that you are allowed to use.

Just because your hand has 10 HCP... but has 13 spades... doesn't mean you will pass. You'll bid your 7 Spades and call it a day.

Bridge has many shades of grey. It is learning how to dance them correctly that is hard.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com