Ethical Issue

[awm]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sa8hq9dkt9864c873]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Here's a hand from a while back. This came up in the second day of Life Master Pairs. The auction is as follows, with LHO the dealer:

 

1♣ - Pass - 1♥ - Pass

2♥ - Pass* - 4♥ - Pass

Pass - Pass**

 

* Partner hesitates noticably over 2♥.

** Opponents try to pick up their bidding cards before the final pass. Partner says "Sorry, I have a problem" then thinks about a minute and passes.

 

What do you lead? How do you feel that the UI on this board effects your choice of lead, if at all?

[hrothgar]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sa8hq9dkt9864c873]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Here's a hand from a while back. This came up in the second day of Life Master Pairs. The auction is as follows, with LHO the dealer:

 

1♣ - Pass - 1♥ - Pass

2♥ - Pass* - 4♥ - Pass

Pass - Pass**

 

* Partner hesitates noticably over 2♥.

** Opponents try to pick up their bidding cards before the final pass. Partner says "Sorry, I have a problem" then thinks about a minute and passes.

 

What do you lead? How do you feel that the UI on this board effects your choice of lead, if at all?

I think that the hesitation suggests Ace of Spades and a Spade...

[inquiry]

The hesitation and your hand clearly suggest partner was thinking to bid 4♠. So ♠A and ♠ is strongly suggested by the hesitation.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

Have you cosidered getting a new partner? He dumped a real UI problem in your lap 'with' not just one but two of his 'pauses.' Didn't he feel that just one pause was sufficent?

 

That second pasue and 'pass' took a 'minute?' Would you mind posting his hand, I am really curious about just what he was 'thinking' about.

 

What are you agreements about a passed hand double of a freely bid game?

Void showing(suggesting a lead) or 'trump stack?'

 

When the TD arrives, I will point at partner and say that he 'paused' and passed twice.

 

Did the other pair really 'not call for the TD' after that second pause 'for a minute' and that final pass?

 

Regards,

Robert

[Guest Jlall]

funny, I would have thought the UI suggests leading a club since partner didn't bid over 1C then tanked twice he must have clubs...

 

Anyways I would still lead a club, I could not imagine ever leading something else but a club at matchpoints.

[cherdano]

funny, I would have thought the UI suggests leading a club since partner didn't bid over 1C then tanked twice he must have clubs...

 

Anyways I would still lead a club, I could not imagine ever leading something else but a club at matchpoints.

Same here. How can partner think about bidding 4♠ when he could not bid 1♠ over 1♣?

 

I would have led a club without the hesitation, but I am not sure it is clear-cut enough with the UI.

[cherdano]

Hi everyone

 

Have you cosidered getting a new partner? He dumped a real UI problem in your lap 'with' not just one but two of his 'pauses.' Didn't he feel that just one pause was sufficent?

 

That second pasue and 'pass' took a 'minute?' Would you mind posting his hand, I am really curious about just what he was 'thinking' about.

 

What are you agreements about a passed hand double of a freely bid game?

Void showing(suggesting a lead) or 'trump stack?'

 

When the TD arrives, I will point at partner and say that he 'paused' and passed twice.

 

Did the other pair really 'not call for the TD' after that second pause 'for a minute' and that final pass?

 

Regards,

Robert

Get a break. Partner probably thought for a minute because he had a difficult problem. Why should opponents all the TD? Taking time for a decision is not against an infraction, only using UI is.

[mike777]

funny, I would have thought the UI suggests leading a club since partner didn't bid over 1C then tanked twice he must have clubs...

 

Anyways I would still lead a club, I could not imagine ever leading something else but a club at matchpoints.

Ok why a neutral lead such as a club at MP. At least two people mentioned it was the obvious lead. It is far from that for me. Thanks in advance.

 

I would think partner can still have some points and not overcall one club at this vul.

[Winstonm]

funny, I would have thought the UI suggests leading a club since partner didn't bid over 1C then tanked twice he must have clubs...

 

Anyways I would still lead a club, I could not imagine ever leading something else but a club at matchpoints.

This was my thoughts as well....partner must have been considering the risk of bidding 5C, not 4S.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

what would be my normal lead?

- not a heart

- not a club (they have bid the suit)

and it is certainly not passive, there

are lots of combinations out there,

which will give a trick away

 

so I have the choice between diamonds

and a spade, both are agressive and

I would pick diamond, it is less

spectatcular, ... and I may need the

Ace to collect the diamond trick.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[hotShot]

In the bidding questions we often read that people will pass the first round, hoping to get a better chance to describe the hand they have.

As usual when the next chance comes up (if it comes up at all), there is still no good way to show your hand. So you tank and create a UI situation.

 

So partner has a hand that has no bid over 1♣. A 4225 hand (or 4135) comes in mind. Obviously he holds more than a few hcp and 4♥ is preemptive. Opening strength might make sense.

 

Suggested leads are in this order: ♣, ♠.

[mike777]

In the bidding questions we often read that people will pass the first round, hoping to get a better chance to describe the hand they have.

As usual when the next chance comes up (if it comes up at all), there is still no good way to show your hand. So you tank and create a UI situation.

 

So partner has a hand that has no bid over 1♣.  A 4225 hand (or 4135) comes in mind. Obviously he holds more than a few hcp and 4♥ is preemptive. Opening strength might make sense.

 

Suggested leads are in this order: ♣, ♠.

4H is preemptive? huh?

[whereagles]

I suppose one could argue the hesitation suggests a spade lead, but truth is, other leads aren't attractive anyway. At least not to me.

[neilkaz]

In the bidding questions we often read that people will pass the first round, hoping to get a better chance to describe the hand they have.

As usual when the next chance comes up (if it comes up at all), there is still no good way to show your hand. So you tank and create a UI situation.

 

So partner has a hand that has no bid over 1♣.  A 4225 hand (or 4135) comes in mind. Obviously he holds more than a few hcp and 4♥ is preemptive. Opening strength might make sense.

 

Suggested leads are in this order: ♣, ♠.

4H is preemptive? huh?

Sure everyone jumps single raise to game with preemptively oriented hands.

 

Anyhow this is a tough decision since we are supposed to ignore PD's hesitations when leading and need to survive TD's ruling if he thinks we've acted on UI.

 

Re : UI.. I am not sure what PD has here, but expect it must be lots of clubs.

[Fluffy]

I would always lead a ♦, not sure what partner's hesitation suggest, but probably he was just distracted thinking about what to get for dinner :)

[hotShot]

4H is preemptive? huh?

Why would partner have to think/hesitate twice, if he does not have values?

So opps 4♥ has to be (very) light or a preempt.

 

Assuming he does not have values, than he should have some distribution.

Probably he could not bid a natural 2♣ or 3♣ over the 1♣ opening, but 3♣ or 4♣ over 2♥ should have been natural (6+cards) and weak. If he can't bid his clubs over 2♥, there is no reason to hesitate after 4♥.

If he had 5♠'s, he could have bid 1♠ over 1♣ or 2♠ over 2♥, even with little strength. Again if he had no bid at 1/2-level, why consider it at 4/5 level.

So distribution with little HCP can hardly be responsible for partners "Sorry, I have a problem".

[Winstonm]

In the bidding questions we often read that people will pass the first round, hoping to get a better chance to describe the hand they have.

As usual when the next chance comes up (if it comes up at all), there is still no good way to show your hand. So you tank and create a UI situation

 

I will respectfully disagree, as I am one who quite often favors pass in many close situations. But any player who is worth a darn knows when he passes there is the risk of not bidding at all if circumstances do not allow it. In these situations, if you elect to pass the first time you have to be prepared to either pass or bid later depending on the auction and level and thus should have no problem in that choice and thus no good reason to tank.

[mike777]

If 4h is preemptive what do you bid with a game hand in hearts but no slam interest?

 

And I am still wondering why a club is the obvious lead given no UI?

[mr1303]

I must admit I can't see that the UI suggests one lead over any other. I wouldn't lead a trump, since I think this can only lose, but there's a case for all other suits, either with or without the UI.

 

I think I'd lead a spade, but am not convinced this is necessarily the best.

[Blofeld]

But any player who is worth a darn knows when he passes there is the risk of not bidding at all if circumstances do not allow it. In these situations, if you elect to pass the first time you have to be prepared to either pass or bid later depending on the auction and level and thus should have no problem in that choice and thus no good reason to tank.

Having initially decided to pass and come in later, can't there now be a question of whether it's too dangerous to do so?

[cherdano]

But any player who is worth a darn knows when he passes there is the risk of not bidding at all if circumstances do not allow it.  In these situations, if you elect to pass the first time you have to be prepared to either pass or bid later depending on the auction and level and thus should have no problem in that choice and thus no good reason to tank.

Having initially decided to pass and come in later, can't there now be a question of whether it's too dangerous to do so?

Maybe the initial pass was clear, because you had no bid, and have to figure out whether come in later later?

[awm]

So here's what happened at the table:

 

I decided that the hesitation might imply that partner has spades, so I shouldn't lead the ♠A. I'm not personally a believer in leading away from kings especially at MP scoring against a suit contract. So I decided to go passive and lead the club 3 (3/5 leads). Partner's hand turned out to be:

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxxxxxxhxxdaqxxxc]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Partner ruffed the opening club lead and thought for a while. Deciding to read my ♣3 as suit preference (which it wasn't) he underlead the diamond ace back to my king (despite dummy's singleton) and I gave him another ruff. Then a spade was lead back to my ace and the hand was over, down one.

 

The opponents were a well-known pro-client pair who have won multiple national championships. They called the director here and suggested that "partner must've been thinking about doubling 4♥, which would ask for a club lead" and that therefore I should not be permitted to lead a club. I felt this was dubious at best, since a double would probably just be "penalty" and if I was trying to give a ruff I would probably lead a diamond in any case. It was particularly annoying since without the UI I would probably have lead the ♠A on this auction (which also leads to a one-trick set fairly easily, since our obvious shift signalling methods make it easy for partner to request a club switch). I had chosen to lead a club specifically because I thought partner's hesitation suggested a spade lead and then had my club lead rolled back. In any case the director changed the result to 4♥=, which was actually an average-plus for us since many people were making five on the hand for some reason. Partner and I chose not to appeal, in part because we were relative unknowns playing against famous elite players, and in part because we were above average on the board in any case (and were afraid committee would further alter the result to 4♥+1, which seemed to be fairly common in the field).

 

In any case, I think UI problems on opening lead are particularly difficult to resolve, because you rarely get much agreement on what to lead (on this problem three of the four suits seem to have roughly equal following) and there's a sensible argument for almost anything to be "suggested" by the UI. I was curious what others would think about this ruling and situation.

[Winstonm]

But any player who is worth a darn knows when he passes there is the risk of not bidding at all if circumstances do not allow it.  In these situations, if you elect to pass the first time you have to be prepared to either pass or bid later depending on the auction and level and thus should have no problem in that choice and thus no good reason to tank.

Having initially decided to pass and come in later, can't there now be a question of whether it's too dangerous to do so? (emphasis added)

Having initially decided to pass and maybe come in later is more apt, imo, and as such you should know with the first pass at what level the hand can still be profitably shown and know there is the chance to be blown out of the water by jump rebids. It might seem nitpicking, but I think there is substantial difference between "pass and come in later" and "pass and hope to come in later".

 

With the hand shown, the only problem comes in the first round of bidding, i.e., to bid over 1H - having elected not to do so there is no futher problem. To me this is the heart of Fast In/Fast Out pricinples - bidding early and lightly carries much less risk than passing and bidding later. This may seem conflicting with what I often say about passing - but those times what I have left unsaid as I thought it obvious is that if you do pass you may very well have to pass throughout the hand.

I hope I have never implied that I would pass and always bid, as that is certainly not the message I was trying to convey.

On this hand, I would have bid 2C (Michael's) the first time and not had the problem later.

[Winstonm]

Maybe the initial pass was clear, because you had no bid, and have to figure out whether come in later later?

 

 

I am having trouble finding a hand that would pass second seat and then have a problem later. Maybe along the lines of AJxx, x, KQxx, Axxx and RHO opens 1C, leaving you with no good bid, but even then if RHO second bid is 3 or 4 hearts, showing strength, there is no reason to get involved or to tank. The only problem I can see is if the auction started, 1C-P-1H-P-2H-?, and even then one could have in mind a plan for this contigency and act without undo hesitation, don't you think?

[dake50]

Hard (not impossible) to imagine D lead blowing defense. But S/C must be just so.