[kenrexford]

barmar, on Dec 4 2007, 04:00 PM, said:

Ken, you originally said:

Quote

However, people who are distracted into coffee-housing often pay too little attention to the cards and make irrational plays.

Isn't coffee-housing defined to be a deliberate hesitation that's intended to fool an opponent? What does distraction have to do with it? Do you mean unnecessary, but unintentional, hesitation?

As coffee-housing situation is usually easy to spot if you are so inclined. However, if you spend your time figuring out how to coffee-house people, you probably need this edge because your skills are lacking. Because your skills are generally lacking, and you are dedicating a lot of effort to how to coffee-house, you are probably missing other aspects of the hand. That's what I meant.

[barmar]

kenrexford, on Dec 4 2007, 05:38 PM, said:

barmar, on Dec 4 2007, 04:00 PM, said:

Ken, you originally said:

Quote

However, people who are distracted into coffee-housing often pay too little attention to the cards and make irrational plays.

Isn't coffee-housing defined to be a deliberate hesitation that's intended to fool an opponent? What does distraction have to do with it? Do you mean unnecessary, but unintentional, hesitation?

As coffee-housing situation is usually easy to spot if you are so inclined. However, if you spend your time figuring out how to coffee-house people, you probably need this edge because your skills are lacking. Because your skills are generally lacking, and you are dedicating a lot of effort to how to coffee-house, you are probably missing other aspects of the hand. That's what I meant.

That's similar to the assumption that only poor bridge players cheat, because good players don't need to. But there have been a number of cheating scandals involving world-class players.

In the case of coffee-housing, I think some of it comes from their rubber bridge experience. High-stakes RB tends to be no-holds-barred, I've heard, and attempts to deceive through mannerisms are more common. There's no TD or AC to complain to if you're duped this way.

[MFA]

I think that awarding all 4 tricks would be too much here.

jdonn advice to play the partner of the huddler for the queen of trumps is spot on. 90% to succeed is about right.

[pretzalz]

Ken, you were the one coffee housing, not LHO. In the 4 card ending as described, leading the SJ is a clear error whose only purpose is to try to get a reaction from LHO. You were looking for a reaction and consequently saw one where one may or may not have existed.

If there was a 'hitch', LHO was probably pausing because it is now clear to him that you've misplayed the position, but since he regrettably doesn't have the stiff SQ it won't matter and he missed out on a good board through poor luck. Or from general annoyance that you thought he was stupid enough to fall for this stupid play instead of taking a legitimate line.

[kenrexford]

pretzalz, on Dec 15 2007, 12:40 AM, said:

Ken, you were the one coffee housing, not LHO. In the 4 card ending as described, leading the SJ is a clear error whose only purpose is to try to get a reaction from LHO. You were looking for a reaction and consequently saw one where one may or may not have existed.

If there was a 'hitch', LHO was probably pausing because it is now clear to him that you've misplayed the position, but since he regrettably doesn't have the stiff SQ it won't matter and he missed out on a good board through poor luck. Or from general annoyance that you thought he was stupid enough to fall for this stupid play instead of taking a legitimate line.

Well, you actually got that wrong also. The high pip in dummy was the 9. Sure, I should probably have mentioned that, but I could not imagine that anyone who did not know where the spade nine was would play for the single position of the stiff Queen of spades to the right rather than for the six positions of the spades being 2-2. However, just to help you eliminate that bizarre line, I did, in fact, have the spade 9 on the table. In fact, I had already ruffed with the 8 and 7 in the cross-ruff.

So, contrary to your claims (which are wrong even under your misunderstanding of the pip locations), my line was clearly the correct line.

What irritates me most is that you would accuse me of being unethical because I elected to lead out the Jack from KJ10. That is a fairly innocent play that 99% of the world would make, probably even if you included people who do not know how to play bridge.

Misplaced arrogance and hostility based upon ignorance are often bedfellows.

[pretzalz]

kenrexford, on Dec 15 2007, 01:42 AM, said:

What irritates me most is that you would accuse me of being unethical because I elected to lead out the Jack from KJ10. That is a fairly innocent play that 99% of the world would make, probably even if you included people who do not know how to play bridge.

To be clear, while I think that play is primarily a coffee house, I would never call it an 'unethical' coffee house. The presence of the 9 in dummy does change things, I assumed if relevant cards were missing they were in the defense. My main problem is that declarer for the most part controls the tempo of the hand, and declarer is now trying to exploit tempo to gain information. While I may use this 'gambit' to induce a cover in some situations, I try not to take inferences from the tempo[perhaps I play too much with and against people who, without malice, can't play in tempo even when they have no problem].

Another possibility is that LHO was thinking of something and needed a couple of seconds to finish his train of thought.

[pretzalz]

kenrexford, on Dec 15 2007, 01:42 AM, said:

So, contrary to your claims (which are wrong even under your misunderstanding of the pip locations), my line was clearly the correct line.

---

If you start with the Jack, how are you going to make it? It seems to me SA, spake to K is the correct line. [After dropping the Q you have a high crossruff]

[kenrexford]

pretzalz, on Dec 15 2007, 12:59 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Dec 15 2007, 01:42 AM, said:

So, contrary to your claims (which are wrong even under your misunderstanding of the pip locations), my line was clearly the correct line.

---

If you start with the Jack, how are you going to make it? It seems to me SA, spake to K is the correct line. [After dropping the Q you have a high crossruff]

Actually, I guess you are right. I was blinded by knowing that I had the spade nine. Without it, I know I will play two rounds of spades, no matter what LHO does. If he has the stiff Queen, then I do need to play the Ace from hand first. Good point.

Knowing that I held the spade 9 in dummy, playing the Jack is not exploiting tempo. Further, even if playing the Jack allows Declarer to "exploit" tempo, the tempo that you are exploiting is the ability of the opponent to play smoothly under pressure. I do not see how that could be somehow unfair, as you suggest.

In contrast, there might be a slight hesitation, a slight speed up, or the like, but grasping at cards with a look of consternation as to what should be played, and theatrically tanking is different. That is not a play meant to cover one's thoughts. That is meant to scream out a holding that does not exist.

Now, I also agree with the general sentiment suggested by some that a tempo break might be able to enter the world of fair tactics, but for the risk of conveyance of info to partner. I do not see anything being malum in se about misleading the opponent if it will not benefit the partner. I could imagine hesitations switching to UI analysis quite easily. But, that is not the standard these days. If I cannot coffee-house intentionally (and as an attorney I would be damned good at it, and am damned good at it at the dinner table with friends), then LHO cannot either.

[beatrix45]

I am a little confused as to how one could possibly justify awarding declarer all of the last four tricks regardless of the tempo that LHO used in playing her last four cards.

1. declarer relies on opponents' tempo breaks at his own risk

2. LHO's discard of the club king was not an error. To assume she would have made such an egregious error as to discard the club king had you finessed in spades is far fetched.