[jdonn]

I'm arriving a little late but there were two comments that caught my eye.

inquiry, on Mar 1 2007, 09:45 AM, said:

If your partner agrees he did not huddle, my experience is that the director will put more weight to his statement, as he was the one making the bid.

This seems to me likely exactly the opposite of what the director both should do and actually does. So unless he admits it he didn't do it? Usually the combination of the opponents bothering to call the director in the first place and the fact that the alleged hesitator had a difficult bid (I agree with you he didn't in this case but I mean in general) is pretty conclusive on its own, regardless of what the player admits.

The_Hog, on Mar 3 2007, 03:58 AM, said:

One comment. East/West should have called the Director as SOON AS one of them thought there was a hesitation. Not to do this and then to call the Director after the lead sounds like double dipping to me.

Technically this is true, but it's very common for experienced players playing against weaker players to wait until they know there is a problem before calling, so they don't detract from the social aspect of the game too much or seem accusatory to less experienced players. After all, inexperienced players have hesitations that could limit their options almost every hand if their opponents really called for every one.

I'm not saying this pair necessarilly was weak or inexperienced, but that may have been the judgement the pair that called the director made.

[glen]

So we travel to this tournament, and besides drinking and smoking our brains out, and besides playing every hand super fast so we can go to the washroom, due to the drinking, or to go outside to smoke some more, we were still in contention. Then we get this board:

(see board above as edit of a previously quoted post converts hand into mush)

My partner passes in first seat because we don't open a weak two with a side four card major. My RHO bids 2♦, alerted by LHO as "11-15, 5+♦s without a four card major". I pass, and then LHO hitches a pass, and partner balances with 2♠. Now RHO bids 3♦ with just 11 points for a minimum, and only an extra ♦. I ask LHO about this, and I'm told "may be a maximal bid or something similar". Is this anywhere close to accurate?

So I bid 3♠ and now LHO finds a 4♣ bid, and as you can see with only 5♣s!!! Now partner bids 4♠, showing great playing value, and RHO, still bidding those 11 HCP, finds a 5♣ bid. I bid 5♠ but thinking about this strange bidding, after the opening lead I call the TD about LHO's hitch. The TD reviews the hands while we finish down 1, then the TD resets the contract to 4♠, quite rightly.

My question is this: how can my opponents bid like this if they are not going out for smokes? Did they just go to the washroom before this hand? Is it not fair?

--- Note ----

Btw, I was not at this event, but I'm just putting the situation how it MIGHT be seen by somebody else, for discussion purposes.

[glen]

--- Continuing in my pretend role ---

So instead of worrying about smoke and washroom breaks, do you know what the opponents do? They appeal the TD ruling!!!

So we arrive for the appeal, and here it goes (AC is the Appeal Committee, Me is, you know, "me").

AC: TD, did you confirm the break-in-tempo with the North or South players?
TD: No, I assumed since North-South did not speak up, it must be true.
AC: So the break-in-tempo was not established by you, and neither was that there was possible unauthorized information?
TD: Well it seemed straight-forward.
AC: Looking at the North hand, what reason could they have to hesitate - after all they had got 2♦ by the West hand, and East was a passed hand. 2♦ should be a fine spot, why would North want to ruin that?
Me: Perhaps he knew he had an eight card minor fit!
AC: How would he know that, and why would he care?
Me: Since the 2♦ opening promises 5 or longer ♦s and no four card major, maybe they know it cannot be a 5-3-3-2 shape, so opener must have at least 6♦s or at least 4♣s. Thus an eight card minor fit is a sure thing.
AC: South, does your 2♦ opener deny a 5-3-3-2 shape?
S: Yes it does.
N: Me bad, I should have told them that!
AC: What does your 3♣ response to 2♦ show?
S: Forcing with ♣s.
AC: Does your 2NT response to 2♦ ask?
N: Yes it does.
AC: Can opener reply to 2NT above 3♦?
S: Yes, 3♥ and above all show various maximums, 3♣ and 3♦ show the minimums.
AC: So if responder asked with 2NT, he would risk getting to 3NT or the 4 level opposite, say 13 or 14 points.
NS: Yes.
AC: So we ask East and West, why would North break-in-tempo?
Me: I don't know, maybe he knows we like to smoke between rounds and wanted to take up time to annoy us.
AC: How long was this break-in-tempo?
Me: Well it was a pause, you know, a hitch.
AC: Okay, we will deliver a ruling shortly.

And can you believe it, the AC reset the contract to 5♠ down 1. They never even asked about the 3♦ or 4♣ bids!!! Is this fair? What could the AC have been smoking? You know how much money this cost us? Not winning at bridge does not help smoking, but we are still fuming!

--- Summary ---

North-South should not worry about smoking, but consider appealing if this happens again. Also speak up if somebody says you hesitated, but you didn't!