[Fluffy]

---

Teams (20 VP matches)


♠A lead, showing even number of spades when having AK. South plays ♠3 (lavinthal)
North hesitates for 15-20 seconds before playing ♣6. South ducks the ace when dummy plays low.

Result 4♥ = 620 (♠A, ♣A, ♦K)

West calls director. Says that without the long tank before playing the club south would raise with ♣A to try to give a ruff and defeat the contract, which would result on an overtrick. South says that playing that way he sets up all of dummy's clubs for discards and doesn't make sense.

[shyams]

Table result stands.

Let's say West held ♠862 ♥KQ973 ♦AQ ♣J32. Winning ♣A at trick 2 and returning a low ♣ for a ruff does not defeat the contract.

Let's say West held ♠J62 ♥KQ973 ♦KQ ♣J32. If North is presumed to be thinking because he's working out all possibilities, then North would deduce that there's no harm in cashing the ♦A before leading his singleton. Indeed, not cashing the (presumed) Diamond Ace indicates North doesn't have a club singleton.

[blackshoe]

How quickly was trick one played?

[Fluffy]

 blackshoe, on 2016-June-11, 22:29, said:

How quickly was trick one played?

Nobody mentioned that it was either quick or slow

[ggwhiz]

 blackshoe, on 2016-June-11, 22:29, said:

How quickly was trick one played?

I would be surprised if it wasn't very to very fast. A "huddle" of this length to examine the dummy and plot a course for the defense seems normal. A speed of light shift to a stiff club or whatever at trick 2 is more likely to annoy me.

Might partner still play low at trick 1 with the diamond Queen instead of the spade?

[blackshoe]

Then I have to wonder what North was thinking about during the 20 to 30 seconds or so following the display of dummy. If anything — I do see players who seem to believe they're not allowed to think unless it's their turn to play. Still, I don't think West's argument holds water.

[Fluffy]

 blackshoe, on 2016-June-12, 08:57, said:

Then I have to wonder what North was thinking about during the 20 to 30 seconds or so following the display of dummy. If anything — I do see players who seem to believe they're not allowed to think unless it's their turn to play. Still, I don't think West's argument holds water.

Probably declarer hid the ♠2 so it wa snot easy to read ♠3, also there is not much future in playing doubleton club.

[Phil]

Don't you have to have damage for there to be an adjustment?

[wank]

i agree with west.

yes south could work out that playing a club back needs his partner to have the ace of diamonds, which he shouldn't have or the King of hearts (give declarer JS, QH, AKD, JC and you have a filthy 11 or give partner 7 spades and west can have AKQD) and declarer misguesses trumps, but firstly declarer could misguess trumps, particularly if he plays a diamond or 2 to check for (false-)signals, and secondly, south might not work that out/trust his partner to have cashed AD, and thirdly, he'll often save an overtrick (which he does evidently value), i.e. if declarer has no diamond loser. the 3 points together make it clear that the defence west suggests is a logical alternative imo.

as for north's play, a club switch would of course be swifter if it was a singleton, so ducking is suggested.

[ggwhiz]

 wank, on 2016-June-12, 11:03, said:

as for north's play, a club switch would of course be swifter if it was a singleton, so ducking is suggested.

Now that gets a Director call from me and a bad opinion of norths (lack of) character and especially if declarer did hide the spade 2 which does give north pause.

[blackshoe]

 Phil, on 2016-June-12, 10:33, said:

Don't you have to have damage for there to be an adjustment?

Yes.

[Fluffy]

 Phil, on 2016-June-12, 10:33, said:

Don't you have to have damage for there to be an adjustment?

Sorry Phil not sure if you are being cryptic or something, it is obvious to me declarer would make 11 tricks instead of 10 if south wins ♣A, not sure if it means anything but at the other table on same start south won the ♣A and returned the suit.

[Fluffy]

Thanks for the replies
I was West in the board, from my POV it was obvious that there was UI, an a Logical Alternative, and that the action taken at the table was suggested over the LA. Which should translate on adjustement, but director and somey of you don't agree, so it is not as obvious as it was to me.

Shyams thinks there is no LA to ducking, I think his explanation is wrong when part of the explanation is that north hessitated to work all positbilities. North hessitation is UI and cannot be taken into account when making the decision. South should play the same had he played a club instantly, or after 5 minutes. I was not the least surprised to know that at the other table Lantaron played ♣A + another club, although he was arguably playing with a lesser North.

Blackshoe: I am still not sure if you think there is no UI or no LA.

[blackshoe]

At this point I'm not sure I have all the pertinent facts. What did you play from hand to trick one? How long did you pause before playing from dummy? How long did South take to play the three?

[shyams]

 Fluffy, on 2016-June-14, 01:24, said:

Shyams thinks there is no LA to ducking, I think his explanation is wrong when part of the explanation is that north hessitated to work all positbilities. North hessitation is UI and cannot be taken into account when making the decision. South should play the same had he played a club instantly, or after 5 minutes. I was not the least surprised to know that at the other table Lantaron played ♣A + another club, although he was arguably playing with a lesser North.

I believe you have a valid reason to call the TD, and (based on table feel) you would probably know if South used North's hesitation to their advantage.
I think the point I was making was that such "small fouls" are rarely called in a match. If you've been watching Euro 2016, you will realise that the enjoyment of the game would decrease if every small foul was called!

[Fluffy]

 blackshoe, on 2016-June-14, 03:39, said:

At this point I'm not sure I have all the pertinent facts. What did you play from hand to trick one? How long did you pause before playing from dummy? How long did South take to play the three?

You all made me doubt, I don't recall playing any spade but I htink I would autohide the ♠2 by default.

Would it suffice to say that when North played a club and south started to think on ducking I already knew I was going to call director if he ducked?

[lamford]

 wank, on 2016-June-12, 11:03, said:

as for north's play, a club switch would of course be swifter if it was a singleton, so ducking is suggested.

True in practice. But an ethical North would take exactly the same time to switch to a singleton club as he would to switch with a doubleton. You can only therefore rule that there is a variation in tempo if you have recorded North's tempo in other positions. It is the same with opening leads. The punishment should be for the too quick singleton not the normal tempo doubleton.

[blackshoe]

 Fluffy, on 2016-June-14, 09:32, said:

You all made me doubt, I don't recall playing any spade but I htink I would autohide the ♠2 by default.

Would it suffice to say that when North played a club and south started to think on ducking I already knew I was going to call director if he ducked?

<shrug> that doesn't help decide what the ruling should be.

[johnu]

 lamford, on 2016-June-14, 10:51, said:

True in practice. But an ethical North would take exactly the same time to switch to a singleton club as he would to switch with a doubleton. You can only therefore rule that there is a variation in tempo if you have recorded North's tempo in other positions. It is the same with opening leads. The punishment should be for the too quick singleton not the normal tempo doubleton.

Is 15-20 seconds as stated by OP a normal tempo?

[Fluffy]

 blackshoe, on 2016-June-14, 16:36, said:

<shrug> that doesn't help decide what the ruling should be.

My point is, I don't know exactly how long did North thought, but he thought for long enough to make me certain he had no singleton.