[1eyedjack]

foo, on Nov 27 2007, 10:27 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Nov 25 2007, 10:52 AM, said:

foo, on Nov 25 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

The hesitation was before the =6H= bid, not by GOP.

What part of

Quote

Your partner thought a while before bidding 4♦

leads you to the conclusion that partner bid in tempo?

The OP's hidden comment was

"little pause before the 6♥ bid"

No comment was made about the tempo of the 4♦ bid.

The hidden text currently states

Quote

Your partner thought a while before bidding 4♦, and there was a little pause before the 6♥ bid

To my recollection this is the same as it was when I originally responded. Conceivably it was edited since my post and your response to mine, and then edited back again. I judge it unlikely.

[foo]

I stand corrected and apologize for my mistake.
(I only highlighted the lines below the warning as is tradtitional until you made your immediately previous post. Then I highlighted the entire post to find out what was going on.)

OTOH, in the context of the actual question of the OP, we are not allowed to draw any inference from CHO's hesitation. We can from an opponent's.

We =have= to play CHO as Having Their Bid. Then use our best Bridge Judgement to decide what to do.
If CHO's potential UI is blatent, then we have the additional burden of having to not choose any Logical Alternative that might be suggested by the UI as long as there is any other LA to choose.

In short, if CHO bids in tempo or close enough to it, you get to use your judgement.
If not, then you have to decide what their hesitation might imply and then =choose something else if it at all makes sense to do so.=

So if CHO's pause suggests not sacrificing in 7D, you now =must= sacrifice in 7D if there is any chance that a significant number of your peers as players would take the sac.

[brianshark]

In situations like this, can you leave the table and chat to a director to ask one bid or the other would be what will be ruled as being suggested by the hesitation?

[david_c]

brianshark, on Nov 27 2007, 01:57 PM, said:

In situations like this, can you leave the table and chat to a director to ask one bid or the other would be what will be ruled as being suggested by the hesitation?

That would put the TD in a rather difficult position, and he should probably refuse to answer: he is not able to give a "final" ruling at this point, since rulings are supposed to be made after proper thought and consultation, and his initial impression may well be wrong.

[Free]

benlessard, on Nov 27 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

just out of curiosity 7D X was down how many ?

-5

[lilboyman]

I voted for not sacrificing. Partner preempted and I advanced it. If Partner had no defensive tricks, I think he/she would have taken the sacrifice but didn't. So, we may have 2 defensive tricks and I am inclined to pass.

[cherdano]

skaeran, on Nov 24 2007, 06:18 AM, said:

This entirely depends upon what kind of opponents I'm playing against.

vs competent opps I'd be 90+% sure they're making 6♥, and would save without a doubt. There's no reason to except any defensive trick from partner on this auction. One opponent surely is void in diamonds.

Playing against not so strong opponents this is another matter. I'd be more reluctant to save then. But it still looks like a making slam to me.

At even odds, I would also bet that 6♥ is making. However, given that I am likely down 5 (since I have 5 diamonds, partner is very unlikely to have 8 diamonds, so I expect we take 7 trump tricks plus the ace of hearts), 7♦ costs 1100. So sacrificing gains 8 IMPs when it is right but costs 15 IMPs when it is wrong. Of course your odds are a little better because sometimes opponents bid 7♥ and sometimes partner is 7-4, but I still don't like them (especially against opponents who sometimes bid 6♥ since it might make or we might bid on...)