Card rules · 2026-10-29
Advice Depends on Who Speaks and When
An explanation allowed after a hand may be prohibited assistance during it. Permission to discuss cards needs both a role and a time boundary.
An explanation allowed after a hand may be prohibited assistance during it. Permission to discuss cards needs both a role and a time boundary.
Four situations, not one
An active opponent, a team member, a spectator and a post-hand reviewer can have different communication rights. A team format does not automatically allow every kind of private message. A spectator's ability to observe does not automatically authorise advice.
For a teaching card match, suppose discussion is allowed only after the hand has ended. A suggestion sent during a player's turn falls outside that permission even if the same words would be acceptable in the later review. The information could affect an unresolved choice.
Public and private channels also differ
A rule might permit an announced clarification heard by everyone while forbidding private assistance to one participant. The relevant distinction is access to the information, not whether the message sounds friendly or helpful.
Whether advice is permitted depends on the speaker, the audience and whether the hand is still in progress. A discussion after authorised disclosure is different from privately revealing a hidden card while another participant is deciding.
The same sentence can cross a time boundary
During an unresolved hand, saying which hidden card a partner holds supplies information that others may not possess. Repeating that fact after authorised public disclosure serves a different purpose. A review should record when the information became public, not just when the message was sent. Later openness cannot retroactively authorise an earlier private disclosure.