[Simplicity]

Playing in a club game in ebu-land against weak opponents you deal and have the following auction:

1♥-(1♠)-2♥-(2♠)
P-P-?

Partner takes a moment to consider his options and has been thinking for perhaps 5-10 seconds when your LHO turns to you says 'I believe we can confirm there has been a hesitation?'.

At the table i didn't really give a monkeys the opponents were weak and LHO clearly had a bee in his bonnet about hesistations and possible UI without really understanding what might be happening. However i just wondered if his question was legal or appropriate?

If a slow 3♥ had been bid, wouldn't my RHO have had an inference to not compete to 3♠?

[Ant590]

I'm not sure of the legalitites of the comment, or the timing of the comment, but I'm pretty sure that it is not UI for righty if your partner balanced. I can see arguments for the comment suggesting a pass, double or push.

[hotShot]

Your partner is allowed to hesitate.
Opps are allowed to use the UI at their own risk.
The only one who is under a restriction is you. You are not allowed to use partners UI.

I don't know about EBU-Land, but if you agree that there was a break in tempo it's not necessary to call the TD yet. After the hand is finished opps will usually have an opinion whether you used the UI or not. If they feel you did not use it, no need to call the TD as nothing has happened.

[Simplicity]

hotShot, on Jan 28 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

Your partner is allowed to hesitate.
Opps are allowed to use the UI at their own risk.
The only one who is under a restriction is you. You are not allowed to use partners UI.

I don't know about EBU-Land, but if you agree that there was a break in tempo it's not necessary to call the TD yet. After the hand is finished opps will usually have an opinion whether you used the UI or not. If they feel you did not use it, no need to call the TD as nothing has happened.

I think you have either misread or misunderstood the question. My question is not about any UI issues created by the hesistation of my partner they are obvious.

But rather is LHO jumping in with a desire to confirm a BIT, or indeed his manner not conveying UI to his partner?

[jdonn]

Just turn to him and say "sure". Wtp?

Anything can create UI so you can argue him asking the question creates UI for his partner if you want, although I'm not really sure how. I think the only UI it creates is that he doesn't understand bridge very well (since you will virtually never be acting again anyway so it won't matter if your partner hesitated.)

[mycroft]

Of course it does. What does it demonstratively suggest? I can't think of anything except that LHO wants to ensure that after it goes 3H-3S, you know about your restrictions. You're suggesting that it might show an interest not to compete; I can't see it. Can you show me how it would?

Most people wait until after your partner calls to ensure that everyone agrees about the hesitation - but I don't think there's anything different by having the discussion now (except throwing off partner, and making her hesitation even longer).

But anything that isn't AI is UI. Most UI doesn't suggest anything, however.

[aguahombre]

Maybe OP only wants EBU answers, and I don't know them. But in ACBL:

Frequently, frequent competitors with mutual respect will offer agreement to a BIT and then carry on. So, the answer to the OP question is no, the attempt to establish an agreement about the BIT is not improper or UI to his partner. If no agreement or acquiescence, then the TD might be needed.

The idea that the 2H bidder will almost never bid again anyway might be disputed by LOTT adherants who have a fourth heart and chose not to show a weak preemptive raise on the first round.

After the established BIT, if I were in passout position, I would expect to lose a ruling if I took another call by either introducing a new suit or bidding 3H with only 3 hearts --but win if I had a 4th heart.

[bluejak]

It is perfectly reasonable and normal to establish that a BIT occurred by getting your opponents to agree, and passes no UI whatever.

[barmar]

Yes, it's normal to establish the BIT during the auction, although I can't recall anyone doing it during the hesitation, they usually wait at least until after the player makes his call. I think the main problem with doing this is that it's extremely inconsiderate. If the player is in the tank, he's obviously having a hard time, and interrupting him is probably the most disconcerting thing you could do. The same goes with pointing out to someone that the round is almost over when they're in the tank during the play.

[aguahombre]

oops, barmar is right about that. I missed the OP's part about the comment during the hesitation. That was tacky.

[peachy]

I find nothing wrong in the comment in the lines of "confirming there was a break in tempo" assuming that the comment was made in neutral matter-of-fact tone. Much of the time there will be no need for TD, now or later. But if TD is needed later, then it will be easier for everybody when BIT is already agreed upon.