[TimG]

inquiry, on Aug 25 2004, 09:35 AM, said:

After the hesitation, the only ruling needed would be, would a substantial number of liked skilled people make the same bid as you did. I am never sure what that substantial number would be, it could be 30% or so is what I shoot for here.

I believe this is wrong. After a hesitation, the question is: did the player choose form amongst logical alternatives one which could have been suggested by the UI. It doesn't matter if 90% of the players peers would have taken the same action absent the UI, so long as the action was sugegsted and there were logical alternatives the action should not be allowed.

Of course he did have UI. After a quantitative (non-forcing) invitation to slam, the person who invites doesn't think about redoubling the slam contract, he's thinking about pulling to seven of a suit. The hesitation suggested doubt about 6NT and thus bidding on.

Is passing 6NT doubled a logical alternative. Sure it is: a significant percantage of experts would consider passing. And, that's all you need to determine if it is a LA.

Ruling: roll it back to 6NT doubled, down one. If the offending side appeals, keep their deposit money.

Tim

[TimG]

helium, on Aug 25 2004, 08:47 AM, said:

Hi all, i had this hand in a team match for experts today:

and bidding whent, whit me as dealer: 1♠-pass-2♥-pass-2nt-pass-4nt-pass-?

"Experts" on BBO will get this wrong all the time. Experts in the real world seem to have trouble with RKC.

We don't, however, have enough information to know how trumps should have been set before the intended keycard ask. If they were playing 2/1, 3♥ or 3♠ over 2NT would have set trumps, not playing 2/1, either of those bids might have been invitational.

[inquiry]

TimG, on Aug 26 2004, 11:40 AM, said:

inquiry, on Aug 25 2004, 09:35 AM, said:

After the hesitation, the only ruling needed would be, would a substantial number of liked skilled people make the same bid as you did. I am never sure what that substantial number would be, it could be 30% or so is what I shoot for here.

I believe this is wrong. After a hesitation, the question is: did the player choose form amongst logical alternatives one which could have been suggested by the UI. It doesn't matter if 90% of the players peers would have taken the same action absent the UI, so long as the action was sugegsted and there were logical alternatives the action should not be allowed.

Well, I am no expert on the laws, so take this with a grain of salt... but....

The definition seems to me that the player taking an action after a hesitation has to force himself to choose between logical alternatives. Clearly he has to choose a logical one. For example, imagine 6NTx rolls home, can you penalize the player for passing after the hesitation? Pass is clearly a logical alteranative. Can you penalize his for REDOUBLING if it makes?

It is my belief from years of reading how would you rule bridge world, that the definition of "logical alternatives" is that barring the hesitation, a substantial percentage (what that is seems to change, sometimes 25%, some times 30%, etc, depending upon the editor/author) of "liked skilled players" would have made the same bid. My personal belief, is that it would have to be a higher percentage (more like 60% would have made the bid, becasue you are "safer" in making it after the hesitiation...but there you go).

But in any case, on htis hand, helium's bid would have to be rolled back, and the result changed... on this, the great majority of us clearly agree.

Ben

[TimG]

inquiry, on Aug 26 2004, 10:52 AM, said:

The definition seems to me that the player taking an action after a hesitation has to force himself to choose between logical alternatives. Clearly he has to choose a logical one. For example, imagine 6NTx rolls home, can you penalize the player for passing after the hesitation? Pass is clearly a logical alteranative. Can you penalize his for REDOUBLING if it makes?

First you have to determine what was suggested by the UI. If bidding on was suggested and the player passes, you cannot force him to bid. But, if passing was suggested and and he passed, you could certainly impose a bid (or redouble).

In this case, pass is a logical alternative, but not one that is suggested by the hesitation. So, if the player had passed and that turned out well, there would be no adjustment.

Tim