[kenberg]

This hand is, I think, a fine vehicle for the intended ethics discussion. Let's take a composite of several posters, call him Comp, who have expressed the view that X is clearly right. Surely they could realize, even at the table, there are some nuts out there somewhere who disagree with this. Is Comp obliged to say something like "I know that some folks out there would actually pass this, and I don't suppose I could actually get them committed to the loony bin for it, so I suppose I have to pass"? It seems much more reasonable that for him to say "I think those guys are nuts, so I am doubling, and if a director/committee says I cannot, then I cannot, but I am not selling out to a committee that may or may not exist, so I double". Practically everything in life is a matter of degree and context. There is no way to avoid some subjective judgment, and for that matter I wouldn't want to.

In reality, I don't always apply the rule that I have stated. Hands arise where after the hesitation I look at my hand and say "By my lights, this is a clearcut X or clearcut bid or clearcut whatever, but I know from experience that few people will see it that way. So I concede and call as I expect a committee would insist. There is no point in wasting everyone's time. But usually my choices are not all that weird so if I am clear about what I was about to do, then more or less by definition I don't regard the alternatives as logical, and it seems reasonably likely to me others will see it that way. If everyone agrees that another call has some merit, but everyone also agrees that it is on balance inferior to the call I am choosing, then it is not a logical alternative. So I do it.


If it goes to a director or a committee, I do NOT argue that it was clear in my mind. I agree that in so far as the director's ruling is concerned, that's irrelevant. The "clear in my mind" is the basis of my decision, but I expect the director to rule on the basis of what is clear in his mind. So I would explain why I think the call is clear rather than bother him about my emotional state. Sometimes there is a meeting of the minds, sometimes there isn't.

On the hand in question I can well imagine a player doubling with perfect ethical ease, and a committee overruling the call. Or not.

Incidentally, and here I realize I may be in the wrong, I doubt I would summon the director here if the only thing that happened was some hesitation. Coming in with 2S at this point is at least a bit unusual and in the unlikely event I could find a hand where I would bid this way I would not regard it as significant if my lho gave a little extra thought to this before passing. An anguished tank complete with facial gestures and the pulling of various cards from the bid box would be different of course.

K

[P_Marlowe]

foo, on May 6 2006, 10:24 AM, said:

Please construct a hand that makes sense for the 2S balancer to have after this auction given Opener's hand. 
<snip>

Probability and Bridge Logic says the 2S bidder has made a mistake.

<snip>

Openers hand does not matter, spades in openers hand could also
be in the hand of the guy opp. the bal.

And yes it was wrong to act, but sometime your bal. action back
fire.

Regarding the 2S call: The bal. guy knows, that his side has at least
6 cards, since both guys denied in effect a 4 card spade suit,
opener could hold a 4 card suit, but do you know how high the
percentage is?
That makes it a 7 card fit for the bal. side with a high prob., and
the bal. side witll have often a 8 card fit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

I think, that Foo made a valid point: Your opponent did not bid in the first round, but now, after he got to know, that we have no fit, he decides to bid 2 Spade? This is not normal.

You should have the same 10 seconds as you have after a jump overcall. This does not give pd any UIs.

So if partner needed 5 minutes? Which action is now forbidden?

Okay, he has something to think about: This could be a fit in club, a longer diamond suit or extra strength.
So, pass is the worst bid, which can happen with all this possibilities.
AS some posters would pass playing imps, Pass is a logical alternative, so you must choose this bid.

I would double in MPs, Butler or whatever, even in a team game, but no more after the UI.

[foo]

Codo, on May 8 2006, 06:42 AM, said:

I think, that Foo made a valid point: Your opponent did not bid in the first round, but now, after he got to know, that we have no fit, he decides to bid 2 Spade? This is not normal.

You should have the same 10 seconds as you have after a jump overcall. This does not give pd any UIs.

So if partner needed 5 minutes? Which action is now forbidden?

Okay, he has something to think about: This could be a fit in club, a longer diamond suit or extra strength.
So, pass is the worst bid, which can happen with all this possibilities.
AS some posters would pass playing imps, Pass is a logical alternative, so you must choose this bid.

I would double in MPs, Butler or whatever, even in a team game, but no more after the UI.

If the auction had been only 2 rounds long when RHO backed in and GOP broke tempo, I'd be much more inclined to consider pass a LA and therefore feel compelled under 16A to pass. (Note that this does not mean I think 16A as written is the best way to handle UI situations. IMHO the bridge community may be able to better than 16A as presently written.)

OTOH, RHO passing twice and then backing into a misfit auction when We are very likely to have more than 1/2 the deck and a reasonable percentage of Their trump suit honors is so highly unusual that IMNSHO all 16A based on break in tempo considerations are off the table.

The opening side is now in waters that are rarely explored, and under circumstances that scream that Balancer has made a mistake.

Holding Opener's hand I am always X'ing at Matchpoints unless the =opponents= tell me otherwise in some way (what's Balancer and Advancer's body language etc when this all happens?). At IMPs, things are different, but only because of the Conditions of Contest...

I do not consider pass to be a LA for Opener under these circumstances at mp's
X or bid and if it doesn't work take your lumps like an adult.
If you X and the opponents call the Director after They go for a number, protest the attempt at a "two way shot" even if you have to go to Appeals.

[kenberg]

Despite the fact that I wouldn't double I certainly agree that double is legitmate over a ten or twelve second pause by partner. Whatever the merits of 2S, it is odd enough for the next person to want to think a bit as to what it could be based on, even if he doesn't really see any reason to act.

What really interests me here is Foo's suggestion that with appropriate body language I might be able to dissuade him from doubling me when I make a stupid bid. This is news I can use.

Ken

[foo]

kenberg, on May 8 2006, 09:09 AM, said:

What really interests me here is Foo's suggestion that with appropriate body language I might be able to dissuade him from doubling me when I make a stupid bid. This is news I can use.

Ken

You are always entitled to draw inferences from your opponents actions, tone, etc ATT.
You take all such inferences at your own risk.

However, note that such things can easily put that partnership under LA restrictions, and that "coffee housing" (deliberately trying to confuse or mislead the opponents or deliberately trying to communicate bridge information to partner using methods other than in-tempo legal calls) is unethical and you can easily get nailed for it.

Extreme enough coffee-housing can often cross the line into out-out cheating (cadence count, cadence bidding, the old "A Club vs 1C vs I'll start with a Club" chestnut, etc, etc).

[Helmer]

Hi

Thanks for all you comments.

The hesitation was admitted - and it wasnot the 12 seconds we couldtalk about
but around 2½-3 minutes!

Yes my hand was awfull bad
K108x
xx
Axxx
KQx

I said to LHO - that if I had had ♥King - instead of you, I would make the contract.
(She had maximum 9 pts -now the minimum 6 if I take the king)
But you don't I have it, and I have 9 pts but I don't know what to bid, and I wanted to let my partner chose.

Its more or less my point, the partner could now know that its not 6 but 9 points.

[FrancesHinden]

If you had the HK as well as what you had, it would be a 1NT overcall.

[LH2650]

kenberg, on May 6 2006, 07:34 AM, said:

I will carefully consider the thoughts of those who disagree with this approach.

Ken

Stay with your interpretation. It is fully supported by Law, primarily 73D1. Your legal obligation is to take no notice of the hesitation. See The Bridge World November 2004 editorial for a thorough discussion of this matter.

[Al_U_Card]

A good tactic is to come back with coffees for everyone and say brightly "Oh, is it my turn to bid, already?"

Otherwise just bid what the heck you want and let the lawyers argue it out while you are having that nice beer after the match.....