[han]

I agree that pass is certainly not a sensible alternative, but I don't know enough about the laws or the level of directors (in particular the director that made the ruling) to judge whether the director should have made a different ruling.

However, the appeals committee should let the result stand, so the outcome would have been the same.

[nikos59]

In my view, pass of 3NT is not a logical alternative.
Besides the spade singleton, who on earth
would want to expose the strong
hand? This suit plays well opposite a singleton/void,
and 3NT may well be bid on two small.

Moreover, I consider the attitude of the EW pair
as harmful to bridge in general, since they seem
to want to improve their result at all costs with
legalistic means.
If in the appeals committee, I would vote to forfeit
the deposit.

nikos

[Flame]

Im thinking to myself why is it so easy for everyone to see that pass is out of the question while i would sit for 2 minutes before i would bid 4h.
I have 2 possible answers
1. its harder for me because i got this gift that i can not be effected by seeing the hands and knowing the results,while others are influented some more some less.
2. Its because im a mp player , played mp most of my life, and in mp the chances of 3nt being suppirior to 4h are higher then in imp, infact the solid suit which was said to be a resson to bid 4h ("can play even vs a void") is many time very good for 3nt.
I think its a mix between those ressons.

[Free]

First of all, it's not because partner thinks that we have to pass! Some people still think we can figure out what partner was thinking about and we'll make decisions based on that, but that's ridiculous. If we have a bid, then we have a bid, simple as that.

About passing 3NT, that would be quite stupid imo. Opps have at least 8 ♠s (otherwise partner should bid 3♠), and we have a self-sufficient suit. Even with a void ♥ on the other side, we can still control the trumps quite well. So 4♥ is always a correct bid, so no adjustments.

All I see here are opps who get a normal score and think they can get a good score out of a thinking-pause of an opponent. Everybody can think before a bid, the reason why is irrelevant (poor 3NT bid, slam or not, ...). Djeez! I would even give a warning to these opps for unsportsmanship!

[inquiry]

I think a few things have to be taken into consideration... let's start wtih the bidding.. What does this tell us?

Why did North leap to 3H instead of bidding just 2H? I mean as far as strong twos go, this is a horribly weak one. So first question I have, was 3H meant to be weaker somehow than 2H? Would 2H show some other kind of hand than a hand with hearts?

If 2H shows hearts, then 3H suggest this NS pair is perhaps not the best bidders in the world. If 3H showed a minimum hand (for the 2C bid) and WAS NOT FORCING, then this would affect our ruling. If three hearts showed 20 hcp and solid hearts, I would rule 3NT -4. However, since no mention was made, I will assume that 3H in theory show a BETTER hand than 2H, both with hearts.

In this case, North has misbid when he bid 3H, promising a lot more than he actually held. Given this circumstance, 4H seems entirely appropriate. And I would allow the result to stand.

Now to the issue nikos raised, when he said "Moreover, I consider the attitude of the EW pair as harmful to bridge in general, since they seem to want to improve their result at all costs with legalistic means." I can not disagree more. There was a clear break in tempo, and they called the director before the hand was played. For all they knew, they might have been damaged by UI. As a director, I would have ruled that the result stand, but I would have advised EW of their right to appeal. Since the question is what would a majority of player (of liked skill) bid with the north hand, a committee to discuss the options and figure this out seems more appropriate. Since the committee in this case ruled 4H is the likely bid, and this forum is leaning strongly towards four hearts as well, I think we have our answer. But this begs the question of the difference between an immediate 2H and the jump to 3H.. as the answer to that would affect how I would rule.

Ben

[nikos59]

On "break of tempo" and damage by UI.
Let's forget the specific deal and digress a bit,
because it might be interesting.

Yes, I believe that most players who are quick to
call the director on the slightest break of tempo
by their opponents during the auction
are doing a major disservice to the game. I also
believe that the NCBOs should try to protect
more their novice members from those bridge
lawyers that try to win away from the table (perhaps
because this is the only way to win).

The novice player (or, the player who is new to
the tournament world, or the casual tournament
player or the aged player etc.) is prone to huddling
any time he has a hand that is somewhat different
from the patterns he is very familiar with. This is
all the more true with slammish hands -where the
inexperienced player feels a heavy responsibility
to get a good result. This player is likely to huddle.
If you punish him for the huddle, then he is going
to run away from the tournaments.

It is ironic that the NCBOs that lament their
membership decline are the same NCBOs that
do their utmost to render the tournament game
unpleasant to all but lawyers by extreme systemic
regulation and penalizing breaks in tempo.

nikos

[Flame]

I dont know how it is in your place and i believe it might be different but here in Israel i believe people doesnt call the director enough on tempo situations, and people take are not even ashame on benefiting from thier partner esitation .
I see people cheating, i dont think they even know it but they do, they make noises when they dont like their partner play at the diffence, they make faces, they say things they shouldnt they cheat but thik samll cheats are part of bridge, i wish things were different and people would call the director more, calling the director is taken the wrong way by players, they get offended when the director is called. I believe bridge teachers do bad job by not explaining enough about the director and the bridge law.

[jtfanclub]

Good to see I know as little about directing as I do about playing.

Is there any reason to think that the delay makes bidding 4♥ a betterthan a quick bid of 3NT? 2♦ is unlimited. A quick 3NT bid implies that partner had no interest in slam. A slow 3NT to me implies that he's considering slam. Maybe, for example, he's trying to remember if 4NT is Blackwood or quantitative in this auction. I certainly wouldn't think that a slow bid was considering between 3NT and 4♥...after all, opener already gave his opinion. If you have any reason to be considering 4♥, you should be bidding it.

In fact if responder is doing the explanations for opener, I don't see how 3NT could be anything but a non-forcing mild slam try. There's no way that hand even considers bidding 3NT if it's signoff. Therefore, I don't think pass is an option.

[flytoox]

mikestar, on Sep 28 2004, 08:14 PM, said:

North's trumps are playble opposite a void and if South has enough strength in spades to make that suit safe, either the dimonds are inadequtely stopped or partner's waiting bid is strong enough that 6H must be at least worth investigating.

North can see this from looking at his own cards without even hearing any bidding much less the break in tempo.

I rule pass is not a logical alternative, so the question of whether 4H was suggested by the hesitation is irrelevant. The table result stands.

this is the key. North will remove to 4H whatever south bid. So I think asking for adjust to 3N-4 shld be rejected.

[LH2650]

As for Inquiry's possible reasons for the hesitation, I don't think that 1 and 5 are credible, and the others all suggest pulling to 4 hearts. The unlisted Number 6, Uncertainty about whether to play 3N or 4H is the odds-on favorite.

As for comments about a slam try, 3N was not Alerted, and apparently the offending side made no argument to the effect that it was anything special, so it must be assumed that it was an offer to play in that contract.

Comments about it necessarily showing enough extra values so that slam should be investigated are also incorrect – hands have been presented where 3N is the highest makable contract, and South is in a position to make that judgement.

The solid suit argues strongly for play in 3N. A broken suit would justify pulling. What happened here is that South made a bad bid, but North correctly interpreted his BIT, and took advantage.

And by the way, even beginners have to play by the rules. Learning your responsibilities when partner hesitates is part of your bridge education.

[jtfanclub]

LH2650, on Sep 30 2004, 07:45 PM, said:

As for comments about a slam try, 3N was not Alerted, and apparently the offending side made no argument to the effect that it was anything special, so it must be assumed that it was an offer to play in that contract.

Comments about it necessarily showing enough extra values so that slam should be investigated are also incorrect – hands have been presented where 3N is the highest makable contract, and South is in a position to make that judgement.

The solid suit argues strongly for play in 3N. A broken suit would justify pulling. What happened here is that South made a bad bid, but North correctly interpreted his BIT, and took advantage.

And by the way, even beginners have to play by the rules. Learning your responsibilities when partner hesitates is part of your bridge education.

Again, it is very possible for it to be both a slam try and an offer to play there.

Can we agree on these things?

If responder has zero points, you're better off in four hearts.

Opener has a minimum for a strong two.

If you agree on these things, why can't 3NT both be to play (across a minimum) and a slam try (if partner has a stronger hand), while 4♥ would be an aboslute signoff- if you don't have 12 tricks, don't bid more.

[hotShot]

Flame, on Sep 28 2004, 11:50 PM, said:

hotShot, on Sep 28 2004, 06:16 PM, said:

but please post me a South hand, that is weak enough to bid 2♦, where 3NT is made and 4♥ cannot be done.

And it should have a significant statistical weight. Remember that the hand of E/W are irrelevant in this bidding.

QJ10x xx Axxx xxx
Kxxx xxx Jxxx Kxx
Kx xxx Jx Kxxxx
Q10x xxx Jxx xxx
QJx xxx Jxx Kxx
J10xx xx Qxx xxxx
AQ xxx xxxx xxx
KJ10 xxx xxx xxxx
KQx xxx Axx xxx
109xxx xx Q10x xxx
should i continue ?

Declarer has:
4 AKQJ98 K72 AQ2

P has:
QJ10x xx Axxx xxx

Declarer has 9 quick tricks 6♥2♦1♣ both in NT and in ♥,
but he has a chance to get the 3rd ♠ or the finess in ♣ as trick number 10.
So the chance is better than 50% to make 4♥as well.

Kxxx xxx Jxxx Kxx

Declarer can loose 2♦(AQ behind K), 4-5♠ (AQ behind K) so he might be 2-3 down in 3NT before he makes his first trick. But he has 9 sure tricks in 4♥ and if one of the kings or the J♦ makes a trick he has 4♥.

Kx xxx Jx Kxxxx

Same as the hand before but declarer can loose much more tricks in ♦ and ♠since opps have more. Opps can't get more than 3 quick tricks in 4 ♥ und you can ruff a ♦ or draw the ♣ if they are not worse than 3-2.

Q10x xxx Jxx xxx

You have 7 tricks if opps let you, almost no stop in ♠ and weak stop in ♦,
i don't think that you make 3NT. If opps can draw your ♠Q they have at least 5♠, 2 acces and ♦Q. You risk going down 4! You will go down in 4♥ too, but no more than 3. I would still prefer to play ♥.

QJx xxx Jxx Kxx

Nice hand for 3NT, but if you make it, you need to stop a ♦ or a ♠ so you will make at least +1. In that case you will make 4♥as well.

J10xx xx Qxx xxxx

Great ♠ stop! Opps play 4 rounds of ♠ if they are not 4-4 you will loose another spade when ♦A or ♣K make a trick. To make it you need ♠4-4 and ♦expass or ♣ finesse. (If 4-4 AK9x should not be behind JTxx..)

3NT is not better than 40%.
In 4♥ you need ♦ expass and ♣ finess to work, about 25%.
First time 3NT is a little better, but with this hand i would have passed 3♥.

AQ xxx xxxx xxx

Declarer has 8 quick tricks 6♥1♠1♣ both in NT and in ♥. 3NT have a good chance. If you make an overtrick there is a good chance to make 4 ♥ too.

This time 3NT is better, but if ♠ is lead and the finess does not work, and spade is played again.... you better get some valium. In 4♥ you can take the ace follow ♠ yourself and a gain a table entry if opps play ♠.

KJ10 xxx xxx xxxx

You need opps to get your ♠ trick and they can eliminate you on ♦.

Seems that all hand with enough HCP only in ♠ are a little better in 3NT.

KQx xxx Axx xxx
No doubt over 3NT or 4♥.

109xxx xx Q10x xxx

You make 3NT with this? I see opps take 4♠ and ♦A at once.
Since the strong hand is dummy opps may try to play ♣ before you drop them on ♠.


At 4♥ you can ruff ♠ try to develope ♦ and play ♣ finesse. Not the best chance, but much better as 3NT and you will not go down more often.



So 2-3 of your 10 hands are better in 3NT than in 4♥. All hands are weak and the HCP are in ♠.

Since your intention was to show hands that are better in 3NT than in 4♥ this is not convincing.

[BritTim]

I always try very hard to bid in tempo. That said, there are certain situations that are not all that common that require a lot of thinking about the situation in general. On the bidding 2♣-2♦ (waiting?); 3♥, I doubt I would make a bid in tempo on any hand. What would 3NT mean? What would 4NT mean? What is the minimum strength for 3♥? Does 3♥ demand a cue bid? If so, does 3NT show a trump cue? Should I only cue bid with significant values? Should a first cue bid here in principle be 1st round control?

I would let the 4♥ stand. If I had been E/W, I would not even have called the director as I consider it a normal situation to think.

[Flame]

hotShot, on Oct 2 2004, 04:52 PM, said:

Flame, on Sep 28 2004, 11:50 PM, said:

hotShot, on Sep 28 2004, 06:16 PM, said:

but please post me a South hand, that is weak enough to bid 2♦, where 3NT is made and 4♥ cannot be done.

And it should have a significant statistical weight. Remember that the hand of E/W are irrelevant in this bidding.

QJ10x xx Axxx xxx
Kxxx xxx Jxxx Kxx
Kx xxx Jx Kxxxx
Q10x xxx Jxx xxx
QJx xxx Jxx Kxx
J10xx xx Qxx xxxx
AQ xxx xxxx xxx
KJ10 xxx xxx xxxx
KQx xxx Axx xxx
109xxx xx Q10x xxx
should i continue ?

Declarer has:
4 AKQJ98 K72 AQ2

P has:
QJ10x xx Axxx xxx

Declarer has 9 quick tricks 6♥2♦1♣ both in NT and in ♥,
but he has a chance to get the 3rd ♠ or the finess in ♣ as trick number 10.
So the chance is better than 50% to make 4♥as well.

Kxxx xxx Jxxx Kxx

Declarer can loose 2♦(AQ behind K), 4-5♠ (AQ behind K) so he might be 2-3 down in 3NT before he makes his first trick. But he has 9 sure tricks in 4♥ and if one of the kings or the J♦ makes a trick he has 4♥.

Kx xxx Jx Kxxxx

Same as the hand before but declarer can loose much more tricks in ♦ and ♠since opps have more. Opps can't get more than 3 quick tricks in 4 ♥ und you can ruff a ♦ or draw the ♣ if they are not worse than 3-2.

Q10x xxx Jxx xxx

You have 7 tricks if opps let you, almost no stop in ♠ and weak stop in ♦,
i don't think that you make 3NT. If opps can draw your ♠Q they have at least 5♠, 2 acces and ♦Q. You risk going down 4! You will go down in 4♥ too, but no more than 3. I would still prefer to play ♥.

QJx xxx Jxx Kxx

Nice hand for 3NT, but if you make it, you need to stop a ♦ or a ♠ so you will make at least +1. In that case you will make 4♥as well.

J10xx xx Qxx xxxx

Great ♠ stop! Opps play 4 rounds of ♠ if they are not 4-4 you will loose another spade when ♦A or ♣K make a trick. To make it you need ♠4-4 and ♦expass or ♣ finesse. (If 4-4 AK9x should not be behind JTxx..)

3NT is not better than 40%.
In 4♥ you need ♦ expass and ♣ finess to work, about 25%.
First time 3NT is a little better, but with this hand i would have passed 3♥.

AQ xxx xxxx xxx

Declarer has 8 quick tricks 6♥1♠1♣ both in NT and in ♥. 3NT have a good chance. If you make an overtrick there is a good chance to make 4 ♥ too.

This time 3NT is better, but if ♠ is lead and the finess does not work, and spade is played again.... you better get some valium. In 4♥ you can take the ace follow ♠ yourself and a gain a table entry if opps play ♠.

KJ10 xxx xxx xxxx

You need opps to get your ♠ trick and they can eliminate you on ♦.

Seems that all hand with enough HCP only in ♠ are a little better in 3NT.

KQx xxx Axx xxx
No doubt over 3NT or 4♥.

109xxx xx Q10x xxx

You make 3NT with this? I see opps take 4♠ and ♦A at once.
Since the strong hand is dummy opps may try to play ♣ before you drop them on ♠.


At 4♥ you can ruff ♠ try to develope ♦ and play ♣ finesse. Not the best chance, but much better as 3NT and you will not go down more often.



So 2-3 of your 10 hands are better in 3NT than in 4♥. All hands are weak and the HCP are in ♠.

Since your intention was to show hands that are better in 3NT than in 4♥ this is not convincing.

Well i dont want to get into it, but many things your analyzation of the hands are bad, try to calculate the chances and you might understand how wrong you are on.
Anyway its enough for me about it.

[inquiry]

LH2650, on Sep 30 2004, 08:45 PM, said:

As for Inquiry's possible reasons for the hesitation, I don't think that 1 and 5 are credible, and the others all suggest pulling to 4 hearts. The unlisted Number 6, Uncertainty about whether to play 3N or 4H is the odds-on favorite.

Well, I don't know about you, but people sometimes have a lot to think over their partenrs bid. The decision to bid or not bid a side suit when partner has shown a great playing suit causes some people problems. So while you think #1 (1) Shoujld I introduce my own 6 card spade suit (theoretically))" is not credible, I would disagree, assuming that the jump to 3H did not "set trump suit" and if 3NT is passable, then jump to 3H in fact did not set turmp suit. Like most people, I play 3H as setting trumps and asking for control cue-bidding... but after the long pause, it is clear this pair does not play this way.

As for the credibility to number five (Is this time to pass a forcing bid?), I often consider this but almost never go through with it. But looking at what the opener had for his jump to 3H, maybe reconsidering and passing this with a broke hand is right after all... considering that opener had 8 tricks at most on his own. Take away responders club king and 3H will not make, much less four hearts or 3NT.

As for "all the other choices" favoring bidding 4H over 3NT, I seriously doubt "should I cue-bid my values in suit "x" with a void in hearts" (option 2) favors bidding 4H.

I happen to agree wtih BritTim, sometimes you just have to have time to think.

[Aljosa]

This is very simply:

4♥ stays

procedural warning to N/S

A.

[LH2650]

To Inquiry: I regret my comment that some of your proposed reasons for a hesitation were not credible, because that comment was unnecessary. I will replace it with this: I contend that all reasons suggested for a hesitation, except the inadmissible "3N as a slam try" clearly suggest pulling. Therefore, we have two of the three elements necessary to REQUIRE a score adjustment. The last element is that passing 3N is a Logical Alternative. I think it is. That is why we have committees.

To Aljosa: How can you possibly propose a procedural warning to NS and not adjust the score? Unless Unauthorized Information has been used, there is no infraction. If UI has been used, then the score adjustment is required.

[the hog]

"I think it is."

Interesting! I think it is clearly not unless you were playing in a Saturday afternoon duplicate with lols.