[kenrexford]

So, I received an email with another of the countless hesitation nightmares we have all heard. It got me to chuckling. My idea? Legalize hesitations, since they are de facto legal anyway, but then develop the theory.

I'm joking, of course.

But, I thought about the hesitation theory developing. The beginner hesitators would use simple "natural" hesitations, where hesitations simply showed extras. Obvious, but easy to remember.

Some advancing students would quickly see the merits to canape hesitations, where you hesitate with garbage but bid quickly with values.

But, for the truly advanced, I think that the way of the future will be spiral scan hesitations. I'm sure that the true theoreticians here can imagine the possibilities.

[cherdano]

Competitive hesitations are far more important in the modern game, Ken. Forcing pass inversion hesitations are a good topic for starters.

[effervesce]

Implementing either of those might be quite difficult. Strength-showing hesitations would be easiest; set a base time of, say, 5 seconds, and add 0.01 seconds for each HCP before you place your bid on the table would perhaps be a relatively effective method to use.

[kenrexford]

The theory has started to fascinate me.

I strongly disagree, however, with the entire concept of hesitation theory being applied to competitie auctions. Hesitations should be constructive and not destructive. Messing around with the intent will corrupt the situation unnecessarily.

To explain. I think that competitive decisions should be done by way of hitch theory. Some may think that hitch theory is very similar to hesitation theory, which is true. But, the nuance and the competitive implications are powerful. I mean, consider the classic move of the inhibiting hitch-double. When RHO is considering whether to bid or not bid 3♠ over your 3♥ call, a hitch on the red card before while he is thinking is golden. Similarly, the hitch on the green card before switching to the 3♥ card prepares the stage for partner knowing that this is a competitive auction only and not a game try. Hitching on the red card, even if RHO passed partner's bid, suggests good defense. You could combine the two well in a 1-2-3 stop scenario.

A typical auction:

1♥-1♠-2♥-X(Rosenkranz)
Green/Red/3♥?

Opener has made a 1-2-3 Stop bid. His hitch on the green card confirms this meaning. That's obvious. But, the hitch on the red card suggests defense against 3♠. This is a weak defensive signal, as the bid could have been red/green/3♥, or either of the blue-green 3♥ bids.

Obviously, however, this is inefective at online bridge, unless we incorporate a hitch key into the programming, which I believe to be critical to the game. I really do not understand how one is supposed to hitch with the existing software, a problem that perhaps Fred can figure out.

[helene_t]

Whenever you make a call that either should be conventional or might have been conventional with different agreements, a hesitation conveys the conventional meaning. I think this is the most robust use of the hesitation, since if you have to bid fast in order not to confuse partner with a false hesitation, you are likely to forget the convention. So

(1♠)-3♣!
shows clubs while
(1♠)-......3♣
is Ghestem.

[Codo]

Helene you are on the right track.
And if you use the stop card you can show so many different hands:

quick 3♣ then STOP: Long clubs weak
quick STOP then 3♣ Long clubs intermed.
quick 3 ♣ Fitjump
slow stop then 3♣ intermed. Ghestem
slow 3 ♣ then stop weak strength Ghest.
slow 3♣ strong two suiter.

Bidding will improve rapidly.

[kenrexford]

Codo, on Apr 30 2008, 02:15 AM, said:

Helene you are on the right track.
And if you use the stop card you can show so many different hands:

quick 3♣ then STOP: Long clubs weak
quick STOP then 3♣ Long clubs intermed.
quick 3 ♣ Fitjump
slow stop then 3♣ intermed. Ghestem
slow 3 ♣ then stop weak strength Ghest.
slow 3♣ strong two suiter.

Bidding will improve rapidly.

I like this. Never thought of the stop card. That opens up all sorts of ideas. TD card, asking questions of the opponents, and the like. Who needs "suggested defenses" if you have a well-tuned system involving these actions?

[Rossoneri]

Clearly, a system for the 21st century!

One could apply it to situations involving jump bids which can be confused as either cue or splinter as well.