[Fluffy]

South is professional, north is terrible (Saying the least).

Scoring: MP

pass-pass-pass-1NT
2NT-pass-3♣- X
all pass

---

I led the ♣A and before dummy could start to show, my partner started to produce dummy as well, showing ♠KQxxx.

I stopped him, then we called director. East explained the bidding wich seemed to have no sense since the problem was in the play, but later I was told that he said that my partner had hesitated after 2NT.


♠KQxxx were penalised cards and after first trick declarer asked East if he would want to force a spade/non spade lead and he banned a spade lead. At this point the penalty was gone and all the 5 cards returned to my partner's hand.

I played a heart, then got in with ♦A, cashed ♣K an ♠A +♠. Partner didn't return his third trump wich allowed declarer to ruff a diamond for -200.


3 boards later director told me that because my partner had hesitated I was banned from doubling with only 4 tricks and that the result was corrected to -100 (a bottom instead of a top)


Well I know when my partner hesitates, and here I noticed nothing, my partner is slow, he might hesitate with nothing and often he doesn't even know it is his turn, he revokes 2/3 times each touney. And he always passes so I have to bid his cards for him and have good guesses. I had a good guess this time, but it seems like RHO thinking that my partner hesitated (he might have taken some time before pass, but not a break on his usual tempo, at least not enough for me to notice) is enough to ban me from taking the right guess.

Also to mention LHO didn't pay attention and wasn't sure enough as to say if north hesitated or not.


I doubt east would say that north had hesitated if he hadn't indeed done so, maybe he did an influenced me without me knowing, I cannot know. But my feeling is that he didn't break his usual tempo (wich is wide ranged)

I remember my opponents making a blatant hesitation then reopen thing years ago, and then when my opponetns lied saying that there was no hesitation director sad that he could do nothing as the hesitation couldn't be demostrated, here its the contrary and an opponent saying so is enough, what is right?

[bluejak]

If a player hesitates his partner is limited by Law in his choice of actions. So, even if you are a good guesser, some of your guesses will be outlawed when partner has hesitated.

It is part of a TD's job to judge whether a hesitation has occurred, so the TD was wrong years ago: if there is a dispute he has to make a judgement decision.

If you believe on this occasion that your partner did not hesitate then you appeal against the TD's ruling.

[jdonn]

bluejak, on Jan 26 2010, 07:42 PM, said:

If you believe on this occasion that your partner did not hesitate then you appeal against the TD's ruling.

Agreed until that point. You shouldn't appeal simply because you disagree with the judgment. Should you?

[peachy]

The available evidence makes me believe there was a hesitation.
1. The opponent said there was BIT.
2. A "terrible player" - using your description - would hesitate over 2NT with the given cards.
2. Someone whose tempo is historically known (as you said) to be errant, likely hesitated.

After this fact-finding is over, the rest is easy. Just rule hoe the law tells TD to rule.
As a professional, you gracefully accept the ruling and if there is basis for appeal, then you appeal. I believe you when you say you didn't notice it but that really does not matter. The likelihood that BIT happened is much greater than that it did not, IMO. Ruling is correct, IMO.

[Mbodell]

Also, I'm not sure how much of a "benefit" you get when you have a partner who has a wide ranging tempo. I also sometimes play with one such partner, but if she takes 10 seconds or so, I think it can still be ruled a BIT even if she routinely takes 10 seconds with some significant minority of her calls (I.e., the "wide ranging" tempo that you discussed).

Unless someone is consistent like clockwork I doubt statements like "she takes 10 seconds 1/3 of the time, often with nothing to think about" would trump the first two points peachy made about an opponent claiming a BIT and the hand in question being one where a BIT for thinking is likely.

[blackshoe]

jdonn, on Jan 26 2010, 07:54 PM, said:

Agreed until that point. You shouldn't appeal simply because you disagree with the judgment. Should you?

Whyever not? Players have an absolute right to appeal any ruling by the director. Granted, there is the possibility of sanction if the appeal is deemed without merit, and that may well happen here, but that doesn't change the basic principle.

[ggwhiz]

Doesn't the fact that North tried to table the dummy confirm that a significant BIT happened?

Regardless of length, North was obviously out of it and South has to bite the bullet. Sympathy, a paycheck and seriously consider your career choices.

That's a big period, last sentence.

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Jan 26 2010, 09:56 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 26 2010, 07:54 PM, said:

Agreed until that point. You shouldn't appeal simply because you disagree with the judgment. Should you?

Whyever not? Players have an absolute right to appeal any ruling by the director. Granted, there is the possibility of sanction if the appeal is deemed without merit, and that may well happen here, but that doesn't change the basic principle.

Do you think "I disagree with the director's judgment" is merit? I hope not...

I didn't say what he has the right to do, I said what he should do. Do you want every ruling you make against anyone appealed?

[Fluffy]

ok, thanks

If I had told the appeals comitee that LHO hesitated a lot before bidding 2NT and that she is a beginner, and that RHO hesitated a lot before bidding 3♣ and I Expected him to run to 3♦ afte my quick double, would they laugh at me? or do these arguments mean anything on an appeals comitee?

[hotShot]

First some basic remarks:

1) Your partner is allowed to hesitate.
2) You are not allowed to use UI.
3) If your partner is beginner and hesitates a lot, than his hesitation might not carry any UI.
4) If you find bids out of nowhere, a TD is likely to think the hesitation carried an UI.

The bidding was pass-pass-pass so you have the AI, that both opps did not have opening strength. This is important, because LHO obviously has a distributional hand with shortage in the majors, so LHO can't have stopper in both majors and good suits.
If RHO had stopper in the majors and almost opening strength, why did he move from 2NT to 3♣ (this is MP!)?
Obviously your partner can't be completely broke. This information is AI to you.
You hold ♣AK ♦A and ♠A. This seems to be 4 tricks and you legally know that partner can't be completely broke. You can argue that under these conditions (for a professional player) pass is no LA.
At the end of the bidding each player had up to 3 minutes to think about all implications and the strength of his hand. The TD often has to rule without taking the time to think about a problem from each players perspective. Of cause you know how difficult it is, to look at a deal from a players perspective, once you have seen all cards.
You need to help the TD by pointing out what you have learned from the bidding.
However it is still possible that a TD will not rule in your favor, but thats what appeals are for.


Hint:
When I was an inexperienced player, I was told by stronger partners that if I have to think about a bid longer than usual, I should not pass.

[gwnn]

hotShot, on Jan 27 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

If RHO had stopper in the majors and almost opening strength, why did he move from 2NT to 3♣ (this is MP!)?

Because he has 3 or 4 clubs? Do you routinely pass UNT bids if you have stops in the majors just because it's MP?

[hotShot]

gwnn, on Jan 27 2010, 11:53 AM, said:

hotShot, on Jan 27 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

If RHO had stopper in the majors and almost opening strength, why did he move from 2NT to 3♣ (this is MP!)?

Because he has 3 or 4 clubs? Do you routinely pass UNT bids if you have stops in the majors just because it's MP?

With 11-12 HCP and a balanced hand, why should I not go for 2NT, if I can assume that partner has close to an opening himself and 2 long suit that can be a source of tricks?
East knows from the bidding that South has 15-17 and a balanced hand and North is to weak to act over partners 2NT.

[blackshoe]

jdonn, on Jan 27 2010, 01:27 AM, said:

Do you think "I disagree with the director's judgment" is merit? I hope not...

I didn't say what he has the right to do, I said what he should do. Do you want every ruling you make against anyone appealed?

I think it depends on the case. In this case, no, I don't think it has merit. In other cases it might.

If every ruling I make is appealed, I'll quit directing, as I would obviously be incompetent at it. But that hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it ever will.

[blackshoe]

We ask people to say what jurisdiction they're in when posting these problems. Did this happen online, or f2f? If the latter, where?

[bluejak]

Fluffy, on Jan 27 2010, 10:17 AM, said:

If I had told the appeals comitee that LHO hesitated a lot before bidding 2NT and that she is a beginner, and that RHO hesitated a lot before bidding 3♣ and I Expected him to run to 3♦ afte my quick double, would they laugh at me? or do these arguments mean anything on an appeals comitee?

Competent ACs listen to, and weigh, all the evidence offered.

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Jan 27 2010, 12:21 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 27 2010, 01:27 AM, said:

Do you think "I disagree with the director's judgment" is merit? I hope not...

I didn't say what he has the right to do, I said what he should do. Do you want every ruling you make against anyone appealed?

I think it depends on the case. In this case, no, I don't think it has merit. In other cases it might.

If every ruling I make is appealed, I'll quit directing, as I would obviously be incompetent at it. But that hasn't happened yet, and I don't expect it ever will.

So if I say he shouldn't appeal, and you believe if he were to appeal it has no merit, I think we agree.

[gwnn]

hotShot, on Jan 27 2010, 11:13 AM, said:

gwnn, on Jan 27 2010, 11:53 AM, said:

hotShot, on Jan 27 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

If RHO had stopper in the majors and almost opening strength, why did he move from 2NT to 3♣ (this is MP!)?

Because he has 3 or 4 clubs? Do you routinely pass UNT bids if you have stops in the majors just because it's MP?

With 11-12 HCP and a balanced hand, why should I not go for 2NT, if I can assume that partner has close to an opening himself and 2 long suit that can be a source of tricks?
East knows from the bidding that South has 15-17 and a balanced hand and North is to weak to act over partners 2NT.

because they rate to lead through my weaker stopper and my partner will usually just have x or xx in that suit and it will be sad for us, if I have 3 cards or especially 4 I will always always pick my preference over 2NT? Partner doesn't promise "nearly opening values" in the sense of 10 high card points, he could have more in the minors and less in the hcp's and it will be a bigger and bigger disaster to play in 2NT.

[Fluffy]

one more question, does technically have any difference if partner's BIT was 2 or 3 (mora than ususal) seconds compared to 35?

[hotShot]

Imagine a complex auction with RHO making an unusual bid.

There is no doubt that a 35 second delay is a BIT and it means that partner had a tough decision. So there is no doubt that UI is available, and It will suggest something.

A 1 second delay may be even disputed as BIT in such a situation, as it's to be expected that a complex auction needs a little more time.

Between these extremes a TD and committee will judge, depending on the bidding and hand, if there was a BIT and if it suggests something.

A 2 second BIT is likely to be considered as important as a 35 second BIT.