Midland Counties Bowl 3 (EBU)

[VixTD]

[hv=pc=n&s=s3h9872d97542ckq8&w=saj8haqj63d3c9542&n=skq976hdakq86cjt6&e=st542hkt54djtca73&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=pp1c2hp4hppdp5dppp]399|300[/hv]

Multiple teams-of-four, IMPs

West's first pass was an aberration, he would normally have opened the bidding

North's 1♣ was Precision, 16+, any shape

East's 2♥ bid showed both majors, at least 5-4, below opening strength

South's second pass showed 0-6 pts

North's pass over 4♥ was made after an agreed pause for thought.

 

Result: 5♦(N)=, NS+400

 

EW called the director to query the double after the hesitation. When asked why she had doubled, South said that her side had the balance of the points so she didn't see that she could pass.

 

Does anyone think otherwise?

[aguahombre]

North opens a strong club, and the vulnerable opponents send it back at the 4-level. A pause for thought by North would be in order. I don't see it sending any particular message to South that he cannot deduce for himself.

 

As South, I cannot see defending 4H undoubled with 4 trumps and a defensive trick. 4HX or 5D (500 or 400) seems o.k.

[campboy]

I've never played a strong club system, but it would surprise me if passing was an LA here.

[lamford]

Before the hesitation, South knew that North had 16+ HCP and 1 or 0 hearts. After the hesitation he knew that North had 16+HCP and 1 or 0 hearts. Nothing is demonstrably suggested.

[iviehoff]

When asked why she had doubled, South said that her side had the balance of the points so she didn't see that she could pass.

 

Does anyone think otherwise?

I do. Of course she can pass. EW may have a lovely fit, rather than (as today) being incompetent. Having a presumed 21 combined points is no reason to suppose that the opponents can't make 10 tricks, even if you have 4 small trumps.

 

So pass is a logical alternative. I disagree with Aguahombre also. Does the pause tell South she didn't already know? Well, yes, it tells South that North doesn't just have the plain vanilla 16-count that would pass without a second thought.

[aguahombre]

Does the pause tell South she didn't already know? Well, yes, it tells South that North doesn't just have the plain vanilla 16-count that would pass without a second thought.

 

No, actually the opponents' bidding and his own hand tell him it is not vanilla. But, if it happened to be vanilla, then the opponents are daft and going for a bigger number.

 

The 4 small trumps are not insignificant.

[bluejak]

Does the pause tell South she didn't already know? Well, yes, it tells South that North doesn't just have the plain vanilla 16-count that would pass without a second thought.

But does that suggest doubling over passing?

[RMB1]

North's pass over 4♥ was made after an agreed pause for thought.

 

Can we assume that the stop card was used and the pause for thought was longer than 10 seconds?

[VixTD]

Can we assume that the stop card was used and the pause for thought was longer than 10 seconds?

All players at the table agreed there had been a pause for thought, so I would assume whatever pause there was was longer than North would normally take (whether that be two seconds or ten seconds).

[RMB1]

All players at the table agreed there had been a pause for thought, so I would assume whatever pause there was was longer than North would normally take (whether that be two seconds or ten seconds).

 

OK, we do things differently.

 

I would ask if the stop card was used, and how, and how long the pause was.

Only if the stop card was used. and the pause was longer than 10 seconds,

would I rule there was an "unmistakable hesitation".

[blackshoe]

I would want to be sure what stop card regs were in place, too. In NA, whether the skip bidder uses the stop card is irrelevant, his LHO is still required to pause ten seconds.

[Cyberyeti]

What was the X of 4♥ ?

 

The pause does say something, a basic 4144 or random 1♥(543) 16 count will pass here without needing more than the stop card, so partner has more shape or points or both, probably with no hearts to explain vulnerable opps bidding.

 

If X is penalties, I'm reasonably comfortable with it, but if X is T/O or just points, what are you going to do over the 4♠ that you're going to hear next a large proportion of the time ? I think there is much more chance of finding partner at home with something suitable with the pause for thought.

[aguahombre]

What was the X of 4♥ ?

 

If X is penalties, I'm reasonably comfortable with it, but if X is T/O or just points, what are you going to do over the 4♠ that you're going to hear next a large proportion of the time ? I think there is much more chance of finding partner at home with something suitable with the pause for thought.

I don't understand this. One opponent showed the majors and the other one chose the strain and level. Why would opener remove the double to the other major? But, yes the double is penalty according to South and to reason.

 

Why North removed it instead of collecting a vulnerable penalty of 500 (only 500 on a spade lead by South and best declarer play) might be just misjudgement, or might be concern that his own hesitation was used by South--which it wasn't, IMO.

[Mbodell]

IMO pass would have been an LA if it was 4♠ - P - P - ??? to South, but over 4♥ I think X is clear.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't understand this. One opponent showed the majors and the other one chose the strain and level. Why would opener remove the double to the other major? But, yes the double is penalty according to South and to reason.

 

Why North removed it instead of collecting a vulnerable penalty of 500 (only 500 on a spade lead by South and best declarer play) might be just misjudgement, or might be concern that his own hesitation was used by South--which it wasn't, IMO.

Sorry, missed that 2♥ showed the majors rather than just hearts.

 

The explanation seemed to be that south knew he had the balance of the points so couldn't pass, that doesn't tell me whether X merely says "I have points, do something sensible" or is clearcut penalties, I presume the former which is why it got removed.

 

With 2♥ showing the majors, partner could be thinking about 2 things, what he was actually thinking about or he could have a lot of pretty good spades (AQJ10xx(x) or something of the sort) and be wondering what to do. If X says nothing much more than "I have a reasonable 5-6, do something sensible" then I think pass is not really a LA, you're almost certainly defeating this and if you're not, you're very likely to be making something and partner will remove.

[VixTD]

OK, we do things differently.

 

I would ask if the stop card was used, and how, and how long the pause was.

Only if the stop card was used. and the pause was longer than 10 seconds,

would I rule there was an "unmistakable hesitation".

95% of the players I come across don't observe the "stop" procedure. They lay down the stop card, make their jump bid and remove the stop card immediately, every time. The next player calls immediately, unless they have something to think about. It doesn't seem fair to allow them to take 10 seconds' free thinking time only when it suits them, when in doing so they know they are conveying UI to partner.

 

Of course if North had protested that he was allowed 10 seconds thought because of the jump bid, it would have been a different matter, but he has admitted to a break in tempo.

[campboy]

95% of the players I come across don't observe the "stop" procedure. They lay down the stop card, make their jump bid and remove the stop card immediately, every time. The next player calls immediately, unless they have something to think about. It doesn't seem fair to allow them to take 10 seconds' free thinking time only when it suits them, when in doing so they know they are conveying UI to partner.

It doesn't seem fair that the player making a jump bid can put his opponents under pressure by failing to observe the correct procedure. If you tell them that they might have gotten a ruling in their favour if they had bothered to use the stop card properly, perhaps they will do so in future.

[DCardnell]

Nor does it seem fair to allow the offending side to gain because they haven't left the stop card out for the 10 seconds that could have given their opponants enough time to not hesitate; after all that is what the procedure is for, to create less UI in these situations.

 

Because of Stephanie's not unreasonable point, i make an effort to count to ten and study my cards whenever the stop card is removed, even though i play in the EBU, where there is emphasis on the player using the card to leave it out for the correct amount of time

[bluejak]

In the EBU it is an infraction not to leave the Stop card out for a reasonable time, for example ten seconds.

 

In the EBU it is an infraction not to pause for a reasonable time, for example ten seconds, whether the Stop card is out properly or not.

 

Nevertheless, some sympathy and benefit of the doubt should be given to a player who does not hesitate the full ten seconds when the Stop card is immediately removed.

[VixTD]

It doesn't seem fair that the player making a jump bid can put his opponents under pressure by failing to observe the correct procedure. If you tell them that they might have gotten a ruling in their favour if they had bothered to use the stop card properly, perhaps they will do so in future.

No they won't, any more than they will start to alert penalty doubles if I have a go at them every time they don't. It's so deeply ingrained into the way they (and everyone around them) plays the game, they cannot change their behaviour.

 

Of course some of the fault is with the jump bidder, but when my RHO removes the stop card prematurely I don't feel under any pressure to act quickly, I just count slowly in my head for ten seconds or so and then call, just as if the stop card had remained out. That's just as deeply ingrained into the way I play the game, and I assume into the way everyone plays who takes the effort to observe the stop procedure.

 

I still think that if the alleged hesitator was in the habit of taking time after a jump bid, and had on this occasion taken just that amount of time, they would not have readily admitted to having broken normal tempo. I certainly wouldn't have done.

[Vampyr]

In the EBU it is an infraction not to pause for a reasonable time, for example ten seconds, whether the Stop card is out properly or not.

 

Nevertheless, some sympathy and benefit of the doubt should be given to a player who does not hesitate the full ten seconds when the Stop card is immediately removed.

 

It is very hard on a player who does have something to think about, as he has to keep track of the seconds while trying to think at the same time. I think that a better regulation would stipulate that a player may take up to ten seconds without being deemed to hesitate but may also bid as soon as the stop card is removed, without being deemed to bid with undue haste.

 

A regulation that stipulate that the STOP card is optional seems strange, and also a minefield -- how are players supposed to know, when their opponent uses/fails to use the STOP card, whether he always follows the same practice?

[RMB1]

I still think that if the alleged hesitator was in the habit of taking time after a jump bid, and had on this occasion taken just that amount of time, they would not have readily admitted to having broken normal tempo. I certainly wouldn't have done.

 

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

 

If the alleged hesitator had been reminded of the stop procedure either at the time (by the 4♥ bidder using the stop card) or afterwards (by the TD asking if the stop card was used). He might have admitted to pausing for 10 seconds. As it is we don't know, and the alleged hesitator is due the benefit of the doubt, whatever he admitted at the time.

[lamford]

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

Indeed, I think the right procedure was to find out approximately long he did take. If he often bid as soon as the stop card was removed after a few seconds, that would be the infraction, not this occasion - unless, of course, he did take more than 10 seconds. It is not good enough to say, "everybody fiddles their expenses, we can't do anything about it" when people hold the stop card there for a millisecond. If the rule is worth having, it should be enforced, and UI can equally be given by the instant pass, on this hand no doubt showing a "vanilla 16-count" with no interest in getting involved.

[VixTD]

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

 

If the alleged hesitator had been reminded of the stop procedure either at the time (by the 4♥ bidder using the stop card) or afterwards (by the TD asking if the stop card was used). He might have admitted to pausing for 10 seconds. As it is we don't know, and the alleged hesitator is due the benefit of the doubt, whatever he admitted at the time.

No, the TD assumed that the stop procedure had been followed, because no one said anything to suggest that it hadn't. And if players need to be reminded to follow the stop procedure, there's a fair assumption that they don't normally follow it, so any pause would constitute a hesitation anyway.

[RMB1]

No, the TD assumed that the stop procedure had been followed, because no one said anything to suggest that it hadn't.

 

That seems an unwarrented assumption given that:

 

95% of the players I come across don't observe the "stop" procedure.