[mr1303]

EBU land if it makes any difference

Scoring: IMP

---

1H (2D) P* P
2H P 3C P
4H P P P

* = agreed hesitation

Table result: 4H making, NS + 420

EW want a ruling on this one. Any thoughts?

Incidentally, NS are a pick-up partnership. South is a fairly advanced player, North is a nervous, but enthusiastically competent beginner.

[JanM]

FWIW I gave the S hand and auction (without the hesitation) to Chip, and he bid 4♥ with virtually no thought, commenting that if partner had as little as KQxxxx of clubs and out, 4♥ would have a very good play (hearts splitting and the A of clubs onside).

Obviously the hesitation made 4♥ more attractive, but I'm not sure that 3♥ is a LA and even if it is, surely N would raise to 4, having already underbid. So I don't think EW were damaged (except perhaps for NS's failure to explore slam, but the hesitation clearly didn't suggest bidding less).

[cherdanno]

JanM, on Nov 8 2009, 08:41 PM, said:

FWIW I gave the S hand and auction (without the hesitation) to Chip, and he bid 4♥ with virtually no thought, commenting that if partner had as little as KQxxxx of clubs and out, 4♥ would have a very good play (hearts splitting and the A of clubs onside).

Or hearts splitting and clubs 2-2.

[axman]

JanM, on Nov 8 2009, 08:41 PM, said:

FWIW I gave the S hand and auction (without the hesitation) to Chip, and he bid 4♥ with virtually no thought, commenting that if partner had as little as KQxxxx of clubs and out, 4♥ would have a very good play (hearts splitting and the A of clubs onside).

Obviously the hesitation made 4♥ more attractive, but I'm not sure that 3♥ is a LA and even if it is, surely N would raise to 4, having already underbid. So I don't think EW were damaged (except perhaps for NS's failure to explore slam, but the hesitation clearly didn't suggest bidding less).

Notably, without knowledge of the system being used I am reluctant to judge what should have good play.

For instance, this auction could suggest the defense proceeds CA, C ruff, SA, club ruff after which it might be a stretch to have good play for ten tricks in hearts.

[mr1303]

Obviously there aren't extensive agreements.

NS play 4 card majors if it helps. However, the auction is best described as "undiscussed"

[Jlall]

South obviously will not pass out 2H so immediately the hesitation did not do anything. I suppose hesitation pass followed by 3C shows values though, so that combination suggests that south should bid 4H. That said I do not think anything other than 4H is a logical alternative from south. Partner is marked with values from the opps lack of bidding anyways.

[peachy]

South has no logical alternative to the 4H. Result stands.

[Codo]

I would call this without merrit if they would call the AC. There is zero reason to pass 2 Diamond and south avoided a direct jump to 4 heart which would be indicated by the hesitation.

[Vampyr]

Codo, on Nov 9 2009, 09:42 AM, said:

I would call this without merrit if they would call the AC.

This is pretty harsh. North's first-round pass is beyond bizarre, and E/W do not have an obligation to know what LAs there are or what might have been suggested by the UI. That is why we have directors and ACs.

[bluejak]

Ok, let's adjust to 6♣ making for N/S.

Sorry, Stef, I would shoot E/W. They are out of line in bringing this case to the TD.

I have just had a weekend of a player who likes to call the TD so as to intimidate the opposition. I gave him a lecture in front of one pair of opponents: the DIC gave him another: I talked to a couple of ladies after the event to reassure them. If you told me he was East or West here I would not be surprised.

E/W here are causing trouble for no purpose.

[Vampyr]

bluejak, on Nov 9 2009, 02:55 PM, said:

Sorry, Stef, I would shoot E/W. 

You and everybody else it seems, but I feel for them.

Dummy comes down and E/W are shocked. They may suspect a CPU. They might not know what one is. They do know that there was a hesitation by a player with practically an ACOL Two bid who failed to respond to his partner's opener. Something very strange has happened and they are worried that perhaps they have been had. I really don't blame them, especially if they called the director before seeing declarer's hand.

Even after, though, they might not be aware of the concept of LAs, or are aware but wouldn't know how to determine them. Why does everyone want to be so hard on them?

[bluejak]

Because I have been playing and directing for so long. If E/W were inexperienced enough to misunderstand the concept of LAs and be totally confused by the N/S bidding, then they would not have called the TD. Sure, if they are inexperienced, they have my sympathy. But I bet you they were not.

[jdonn]

Some people feel "if it hesitates don't shoot it, unless it hesitates against me".

[dan_ehh]

bluejak, on Nov 9 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

Because I have been playing and directing for so long. If E/W were inexperienced enough to misunderstand the concept of LAs and be totally confused by the N/S bidding, then they would not have called the TD. Sure, if they are inexperienced, they have my sympathy. But I bet you they were not.

Experienced players know it is not their job to decide whether or not there was a logical alternative. It is the director's job. There was a hesitation, and north's hand does not match their expectation from the bidding.

I feel it is very normal to call, and while I agree that the score should stand and south has no logical alternative, I am very troubled at your approach to this case.

[cherdanno]

bluejak, on Nov 9 2009, 11:28 AM, said:

Because I have been playing and directing for so long. If E/W were inexperienced enough to misunderstand the concept of LAs and be totally confused by the N/S bidding, then they would not have called the TD. Sure, if they are inexperienced, they have my sympathy. But I bet you they were not.

I know a lot of players who misunderstand the concept of LA. "You cannot reopen with a double after your partner hesitated" is s.th. I have been told several times by helpful LOLs at bridge clubs.

[aguahombre]

bluejak, on Nov 9 2009, 06:55 AM, said:

Sorry, Stef, I would shoot E/W.  They are out of line in bringing this case to the TD.

E/W here are causing trouble for no purpose.

OP states "E/W want a ruling on this one." In EBU speak, does this mean something more than that they called the director?

If, after calling the TD and getting their ruling that South's actions were o.k. on this hand -- because of his hand -- they persisted with an AC, then certainly it would be an appeal without merit. And, then, we could say they are causing trouble for no purpose. Until that happens, E/W cannot be shot.