[candybar]

Scoring: IMP

P 1C P 1H
P 2H P 4H
P P P P

---

Opening lead: A♦, East plays 7♦...
Trick 2: 5♣, A♣, East plays 4♣...
... normal play ...
Trick 6: East (having just won the heart finesse) returns the 4♠, declarer plays A♠, West plays 2♠...
... a few more tricks and this position at trick 10:

Scoring: IMP

P 1C P 1H
P 2H P 4H
P P P P

---

Now declarer leads the 6♠ from the dummy, and they run out of time, both sides get A- and West wants an adjustment to Down 1.

I tell him it looks like making to me, and West claims that his 2♠ promised the Q♠, and his partner will duck the K♠ so he can win and lead the last trump.

I ask East what their discard agreement is, and cannot get an answer. West calls himself Expert, East calls himself Beginner.

Would you adjust at all, and if so, would you believe West and give down 1, or would you believe that East would play the K♠ and the contract make?

[jillybean]

fwiw .... The line of play is not clear, I would let the result stand.
jb

[LH2650]

If you get involved in this, shouldn't you attempt to determine a result for every hand that is not completed due to a timeout? I would think that you should consider an adjustment only when it is probable that one side stalled in order to avoid a disasterous result.

[pigpenz]

all i know is when directing an online tourney i try to keep track of the tournament status to see where all tables are, so i purposely dont try to schedule 120 table games so when i see there is one or two tables lagging behind I go check in on them and if I have to I get out the cattle prod or add a minute or two...if i see someone is purposely playing the clock then I know it.

[shoeless]

To Candybar - "Sorry, there is a lack of evidence to support your request - no adjustment."
To Pigpenz - I agree with your approach to running tournaments - you certainly wont be in a position to have to decide on something like this as the hand would be played out. However, Candybar choses to use the clock to end the round - just the way it is - next!

[candybar]

I find that someone always blames the opponents for playing slowly and wants an adjustment for A- scores. I also think that it's almost impossible to determine who is at fault for the slow play, using the current software. Even watching, it's hard to distinguish deliberate slow play from a slow connection.

So my policy is to adjust whenever the board is within a few tricks of complete, or the line or result is very clear.

These problems are the reason the TD Wish List I posted a few weeks ago contains a request for (1) the ability to add 1 minute to a round more quickly and easily, and (2) timestamps on bids/plays for the round.

I renew my request to Fred to implement this new TD software as soon as he can find the time.

However, I'm more interested in an analysis of the hand and issue in question here. Does it look to you like the 2♠ was a signal showing the Q? If you think it was, would you duck the K♠ if you had the East hand?

[Echognome]

I would say no adjustment. You are exercising too much judgment for a beginner to make that play. You have to work out different permutations to know that you should always play small if partner has the Q. Suppose you swap the 9 and 10 of hearts. Then if East rises with the K and plays his winning diamond forcing dummy to ruff with the J, then that would defeat the contract. Of course, not rising with the King would also defeat the contract, but you'd have to work it out. I certainly don't think the duck is obvious enough to warrant an adjustment.

Second point. Did you look at EW's convention card? I certainly wouldn't take it on word that the 2 promised the Q. I would have to be convinced both that they were playing upside down attitude (and only attitude signals) or that this was an "obvious" attitude situation if they also give count signals.