#25677: "For a nil bid, the partner's books are not added to team bid."
What is this report about?
What happened? Please select from below
What happened? Please select from below
Please check if there is already a report on the same subject
If yes, please VOTE for this report. Reports with the most votes are given PRIORITY!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detailed description
-
• Please copy/paste the error message you see on your screen, if applicable.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• Please explain what you wanted to do, what you did and what happened
Move #417
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Please copy/paste the text displayed in English instead of your language. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• Is this text available in the translation system? If yes, has it been translated for more than 24 hours?
Move #417
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• What was displayed on the screen when you were blocked (Blank screen? Part of the game interface? Error message?)
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Which part of the rules was not followed by the BGA adaptation?
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• Is the rules violation visible on game replay? If yes, at which move number?
Move #417
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• What was the game action you wanted to do?
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• What did you try to do to trigger this game action?
Move #417
-
• What happened when you tried to do this (error message, game status bar message, ...)?
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• At which step of the game did the problem occur? What was the current game instruction?
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• What happened when you tried to do this game action (error message, game status bar message, ...)?
Move #417
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Please describe the display issue. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Please copy/paste the text displayed in English instead of your language. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
-
• Is this text available in the translation system? If yes, has it been translated for more than 24 hours?
Move #417
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
-
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
In this hand, one partner bid a nil. The other partner bid 6 books. The team made 8 books. Instead of crediting the team for the 6 books and losing the nil, they lost the nil, didn't make the bid, and also got 5 sand bags. So every book the partner who bid the nil received was counted towards the team's sand bags, but did not count towards the team's books. That is incorrect, and incredibly punitive. I hope that this was just an oversight.
• Which browser are you using?
Google Chrome v85
Report history
"The usual rule is that when a nil fails, the tricks won by the nil bidder do not count towards making the partner's bid, but do count as bags for the team."
I get that it's the usual rule, but it does seem to be pretty punitive
Further, if they DID, and if the non-zero partner also got MORE than they bid, then logically the zero player's tricks should ALSO count as bags within their partner's score. You can't have your cake AND eat it !
The tricks of the Partner do not count for the nil-bid and the tricks of the nil-player do not count for his partner.
Example:
Player 1 -> Bid 0 / Got 2 Tricks --> -100 for Nil-bid / 2 Bags (took more tricks than he/she bid)
Player 2 -> Bid 4 Got 5 Tricks --> 40 for Bid / 1 Bag (took more than bid)
Team --> - 60 Points / 3 Bags
This seems logical to me
I don't have any official ruling reference, but just wanted to address that the reasoning (initially reported as a bug) is not uncommon.
Add to this report
- Another table ID / move ID
- Did F5 solve the problem?
- Did the problem appear several times? Every time? Randomly?
- If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
