[blackshoe]

Couple of things:

1. I'm not going to "make" EW do anything. If I rule that there was use of UI, and that the NOS were damaged thereby, I'm simply going to adjust the score.

2. What happened at other tables is irrelevant. At this table declarer made nine tricks. If I want to adjust the score, I'd have to adjust to 3NT making, and that does more damage to the NOS.

3. There was no damage, therefore there shall be no score adjustment. Result stands.

4. There seems to be a feeling of "if it hesitates, shoot it" in this thread.

[MFA]

blackshoe, on Feb 3 2010, 03:35 PM, said:

Couple of things:

1. I'm not going to "make" EW do anything. If I rule that there was use of UI, and that the NOS were damaged thereby, I'm simply going to adjust the score.

2. What happened at other tables is irrelevant. At this table declarer made nine tricks. If I want to adjust the score, I'd have to adjust to 3NT making, and that does more damage to the NOS.

3. There was no damage, therefore there shall be no score adjustment. Result stands.

4. There seems to be a feeling of "if it hesitates, shoot it" in this thread.

Exactly.

[wyman]

As this is MPs, my inclination if partner hesitates and bids is that he likely has a hand that would stretch and bid the game directly at IMPs, but he is being cautious at MPs. I feel like his hesitation would suggest bidding and that pass is my LA not suggested by the bidding. After all, though I have 14 hcp, I am 4-3-3-3 and aceless.

Am I crazy?

[aguahombre]

blackshoe, on Feb 3 2010, 06:35 AM, said:

2. ..... At this table declarer made nine tricks. If I want to adjust the score, I'd have to adjust to 3NT making, and that does more damage to the NOS.

4. There seems to be a feeling of "if it hesitates, shoot it" in this thread.

Exactly why I wouldn't have embarrassed myself by calling the director (point 2)

All this nonsense, however, about what the hesitation showed or implied is just that. Opener was asked if he is min or max. Something told him to show minimum when he was max. If we had defended properly against 2NT, then I am confident that the TD would rule 3NT-1. (semi-confident)

This isn't a case of shooting the hesitant (point 4), it is the combination of the hesitation and the gross underbid by opener. But, again, N/S should not expect any gain from any ruling on this hand --and a split ruling for e/w of 3N= would be just plain silly, with 3NT-1 too far fetched (If South didn't notice that declarer already had shown all possible HCP when South was in with the hearts against 2NT, there is no reason to believe he would notice vs. 3NT.

[blackshoe]

"Gross underbid" is a gross overbid.

[campboy]

wyman, on Feb 3 2010, 05:21 PM, said:

As this is MPs, my inclination if partner hesitates and bids is that he likely has a hand that would stretch and bid the game directly at IMPs, but he is being cautious at MPs. I feel like his hesitation would suggest bidding and that pass is my LA not suggested by the bidding. After all, though I have 14 hcp, I am 4-3-3-3 and aceless.

If partner had not passed initially, I would agree that it is not clear whether he was deciding between 2NT and pass or between 2NT and 3NT, and that nothing is demonstrably suggested. As it is though, I don't see how he could have been considering 3NT.

(anyway, agree that I would not be adjusting here as there is no damage)

[wyman]

campboy, on Feb 3 2010, 12:28 PM, said:

wyman, on Feb 3 2010, 05:21 PM, said:

As this is MPs, my inclination if partner hesitates and bids is that he likely has a hand that would stretch and bid the game directly at IMPs, but he is being cautious at MPs. I feel like his hesitation would suggest bidding and that pass is my LA not suggested by the bidding. After all, though I have 14 hcp, I am 4-3-3-3 and aceless.

If partner had not passed initially, I would agree that it is not clear whether he was deciding between 2NT and pass or between 2NT and 3NT, and that nothing is demonstrably suggested. As it is though, I don't see how he could have been considering 3NT.

(anyway, agree that I would not be adjusting here as there is no damage)

I am not sure how I overlooked both the initial pass and the discussion thereof in this thread. One of those days, I suppose...

[Pict]

wyman, on Feb 3 2010, 02:08 PM, said:

campboy, on Feb 3 2010, 12:28 PM, said:

wyman, on Feb 3 2010, 05:21 PM, said:

As this is MPs, my inclination if partner hesitates and bids is that he likely has a hand that would stretch and bid the game directly at IMPs, but he is being cautious at MPs. I feel like his hesitation would suggest bidding and that pass is my LA not suggested by the bidding. After all, though I have 14 hcp, I am 4-3-3-3 and aceless.

If partner had not passed initially, I would agree that it is not clear whether he was deciding between 2NT and pass or between 2NT and 3NT, and that nothing is demonstrably suggested. As it is though, I don't see how he could have been considering 3NT.

(anyway, agree that I would not be adjusting here as there is no damage)

I am not sure how I overlooked both the initial pass and the discussion thereof in this thread. One of those days, I suppose...

Don't worry. You are a passed hand, but not debarred from a 12-count you didn't like, good 11-count , or the 10 count you have.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on Feb 3 2010, 08:35 AM, said:

2. What happened at other tables is irrelevant. At this table declarer made nine tricks. If I want to adjust the score, I'd have to adjust to 3NT making, and that does more damage to the NOS.

Must you assume that the defense would be the same if the opponents bid 3NT? Even at matchpoints, where you try to take the maximum number of tricks regardless of the contract, it's sometimes necessary to change strategies depending on whether you think the contract is normal or not. But the auction and level of the contract also create inferences that will affect the defense.

I've seen plenty of travelers with lots of 3S+1 and 4S-1 on them.

[blackshoe]

barmar, on Feb 3 2010, 06:16 PM, said:

Must you assume that the defense would be the same if the opponents bid 3NT? Even at matchpoints, where you try to take the maximum number of tricks regardless of the contract, it's sometimes necessary to change strategies depending on whether you think the contract is normal or not. But the auction and level of the contract also create inferences that will affect the defense.

Maybe so, but absent an argument from the defenders that they would have defended differently, I'm going to assume they would not. And any such argument would have to be viewed with a grain of salt, after the hand is played.

Quote

I've seen plenty of travelers with lots of 3S+1 and 4S-1 on them.

So have I. So what? I say again: what happened at other tables is not relevant.

[bluejak]

barmar, on Feb 3 2010, 05:31 AM, said:

No split scores in ACBL, I believe.

"Split" scores, where the two sides get assigned different scores, are more common in the ACBL. "Weighted" scores, where each side gets a score which is a combination of percentages of different scores, are not legal in the ACBL.

[ggwhiz]

Did anyone consider that the opener might have made his best ethical attempt in passing a hesitation invite?

Maybe he missed the mark but given the defence, NOT! and I wouldn't fry him for it. Old school subtracts 1 point for that shape which makes pass and 3nt 50-50.