StepBridge Australia Regulations

  1. The Laws of Duplicate Bridge 2017 and the ABF Tournament Regulations apply as modified by these regulations.
  2. The Director must be summoned electronically for any irregularity. Once the Director has been summoned, all play and bidding shall cease until the Director authorises its continuation.
  3. Alerts (including Announcements) are made by the player making the call. An alerted call should be accompanied by an explanation. Players are encouraged to explain calls even if those calls do not require an alert. Any call that would normally be alerted at the conclusion of the auction in face-to-face bridge (including Self-Alerting actions) may be alerted at the time of the call.
  4. Any player may request information concerning an opponent’s methods. Enquiries must be made using Private Chat and should be directed to the player who made the call. Replies to these enquiries must likewise be given in Private Chat.
  5. Players have the ability to set 20 different variations of system cards. It is necessary to edit the library card to match your system used. Players are expected to play according to their displayed system card. Failure to do so, may result in a disadvantage in respect to misinformation rulings. In addition, players must display their name in the Identity field.
  6. The only approved systems on StepBridge are Green, Blue & Red for Open sessions and Green & Blue for Novice & Restricted sessions. Brown sticker conventions and Yellow (HUM) systems are banned from StepBridge.
  7. In general, calls and plays made within 10 seconds of the previous call or play are considered to be in tempo.
  8. Unintended calls or plays may be rectified as per the Laws of Duplicate Bridge. A contestant who makes an unintended call or play should summon the Director immediately. Undos are permitted only upon instruction of the Director.
  9. If play continues after an opponent’s claim or concession is rejected, the result of the board will stand as played. Alternatively, instead of rejecting the claim or concession, the Director may be summoned to adjudicate a result.
  10. A hand that is partially completed when time expires is adjudicated as equitably as possible to both sides.
  11. A player’s table chat is authorised information for the opponents and unauthorised information for partner.
  12. All information provided by the software is authorised. This includes the ability to view one’s own system card during the auction and play.
  13. It is illegal for a partnership to communicate during a hand via any means other than chat to the full table.
  14. The use of external aids to memory is illegal. This includes, but is not limited to, the inspection of one’s own system notes and the recording on paper of the cards played.
  15. Any attempt to gain advance knowledge of a deal (e.g. by communicating with a kibitzer during the game; by playing simultaneously in an event using multiple accounts or; by using a third-party account) is strictly prohibited.
  16. Allegations of misbehaviour or suspicious activity should, in the first instance, be made to either the Director of the event or StepBridge administration (
  17. Situations deemed worthy of further examination will be submitted for investigation. Not only will the session in question be scrutinised, but other sessions involving the same player/pair will also be examined.
  18. Players, pairs or teams who are subsequently found to have engaged in illicit or unauthorised communication will be the subject of disciplinary action.
  19. If complaints are made and preliminary investigations find that it is extremely likely Unauthorised Information has been used, the following disciplinary action will be taken: The player, pair or team will be immediately suspended from StepBridge. If this conclusion is disputed by the player, pair or team, the matter will be referred to the Player’s Jury Panel (PJP) for full investigation and determination. The provisional closure of entrance and participation to StepBridge will remain in place until the judgement of the PJP is known.