Ethics Take

[kenrexford]

A discussion arose about "how bad was this?"

 

Red on white, you are dealt void-AKJxxxxx-Kxx-xx. RHO opens 2♠. You bid 4♥. LHO bids 4♠. After a long hesitation from partner, who passes, Dealer of course passes, and you bid 5♥, which makes (5♠ was the final contract, down one).

 

This was remedied. But, the question is, how bad was this? (Assume the story exactly as given.)

 

As a side note...

 

Suppose, next, that the tempo of the full auction was as follows:

 

2♠-

immediate flash 4♥-

immediate flash 4♠-

long hesitation pass

 

In other words, the 4♥ call was made with absolutely no 10-second hesitation but was immediate. Also, the 4♠ call was made with no hesitation earlier.

[gwnn]

Sometimes even a 2 second pause can seem like a long hesitation after two immediate flash actions. I think taking a while at my first turn is absolutely normal, especially if there's an auction like the one given in the OP. If, however, after all's said and done, there's any real BIT, then 5♥ should absolutely be rolled back.

[Gerben42]

Not sure if I would remove 5♥ as partner's huddle could mean defensive tricks, i.e. suggesting Dbl not 5♥. I mean with support without defense there is really not that much to think about.

[nigel_k]

At any other vulnerability I'm not sure that pass is even a logical alternative. 4♥ is not a preempt where we give up control and allow partner to decide. The actual hand has an extremely high offense to defense ratio compared to the range of hands where we might bid 4♥.

 

Certainly it is quite likely the player simply didn't believe pass could be a logical alternative, so there are no grounds for questioning their ethics even if you disagree with their assessment of the facts.

[kenrexford]

I forgot to mention an initial pass, then 2♠.

 

Part of the ethics question, however, concerns the rest of the story. We have a 2♠ opening, am immediate 4♥ without the required 10 seconds (more like 1 second), an immediate 4♠ without the required 10 seconds (more like 1 second), and then a hesitation (long enough for thought, a comment from one of the players at the table, and then more thought).

 

My personal take was that at least three of the players at the table should have been taken to the woodshed. Opener (that was me) was at least consistent in tempo.

[olegru]

Ethic-wise the 5♥ bid absolutely OK.

Another story that this bid could be suggested by hesitation and director might have a reason to adjust. ;)

But it has nothing to do with players ethic, just a technical problem.

[aguahombre]

My personal take was that at least three of the players at the table should have been taken to the woodshed. Opener (that was me) was at least consistent in tempo.

Yeh, but maybe if we saw your 2♠ opening, you would be joining them for a different reason :rolleyes: Don't ask, "under which Law?"

 

It does seem that we have 3 tempo breaks and one action which might or might not have been suggested by UI. That's why TD's get the big bucks, and I think the hand with the hearts should just quietly accept the adjustment, since he did two things.

[kenrexford]

Yeh, but maybe if we saw your 2♠ opening, you would be joining them for a different reason :rolleyes: Don't ask, "under which Law?"

 

It does seem that we have 3 tempo breaks and one action which might or might not have been suggested by UI. That's why TD's get the big bucks, and I think the hand with the hearts should just quietly accept the adjustment, since he did two things.

 

Actually, I had a better hand than usual! :rolleyes:

[phil_20686]

Outside of high level competition I really see no real problems with this. Obviously it might create UI. In reality good players find most actions close enough to automatic that the stop pauses are just annoying. In this case there are such a wide class of hands that would bid 4H here, and so many of them are not at all close decisions, that it seems hard to imagine that it conveys enough to influence any decision.

 

I think I would bid 5H opposite a passed hand. Its just hard to imagine that I am beating 5S when partner is not prepared to give a dble, as I have way less defence for my bid than I might have. Bidding 4H shows a "serious" hand, although sometimes i is like this, often it is based on playing strength: Ax AKQxxx KQx xx would be a super obvious 4H bid for me.

[semeai]

I think this hand is an okay 5H bid even after the hesitation.

 

As for the second scenario, I agree with gwnn. If it was only out of tempo with respect to the other players' immediate calls but not for dealer's normal tempo, then there's no BIT. If it is out of tempo for dealer, I don't think he can claim to be owed the 10 second pauses that the other players didn't use, and so it would be a BIT.

 

Maybe the players who bid immediately can be given procedural penalties, but I think it would be unusual to do so.

[Elianna]

A discussion arose about "how bad was this?"

 

Red on white, you are dealt void-AKJxxxxx-Kxx-xx. RHO opens 2♠. You bid 4♥. LHO bids 4♠. After a long hesitation from partner, who passes, Dealer of course passes, and you bid 5♥, which makes (5♠ was the final contract, down one).

 

This was remedied. But, the question is, how bad was this? (Assume the story exactly as given.)

 

As a side note...

 

Suppose, next, that the tempo of the full auction was as follows:

 

2♠-

immediate flash 4♥-

immediate flash 4♠-

long hesitation pass

 

In other words, the 4♥ call was made with absolutely no 10-second hesitation but was immediate. Also, the 4♠ call was made with no hesitation earlier.

This hand was really said at our table:

 

2♠ (DBL) 2NT (DBL) (alerted and explained as a relay to clubs)

3♣* (3♥) 4♠ (DBL)

Pass (5♥) DBL all pass.

 

Misdefended so allowed to make.

[semeai]

If it is out of tempo for dealer, I don't think he can claim to be owed the 10 second pauses that the other players didn't use, and so it would be a BIT.

 

To clarify this further: I believe in the idea that in addition to depending on the player, each auction also has its own expected tempo. In this auction some consideration on dealer's part is expected (a fast pass would be out of tempo). Dealer gets whatever time is expected (for him!) due to that, but no more.

 

As I said in my other post, I don't really know anything good to do about/to the fast bidders.

[blackshoe]

There should have been a stop card or skip bid warning before the 2♠ bid and the 4♥ bid. So both the 4♥ bidder and the 4♠ bidder should have taken about ten seconds before they called. Note that the absence of the warning does not alleviate the bidders of the requirement to pause, so even if there was no warning, bidding quickly is an infraction. That doesn't mean that bidding slowly (absent a skip bid) isn't also an infraction. It doesn't go 2♠ (next player must pause ten seconds, but does not), 4♥ (next player gets the ten seconds RHO didn't use, plus must pause another ten seconds, but he doesn't pause), now the advancer (overcaller's partner) gets twenty seconds. No. 4♠ was not a skip bid, so normal tempo for advancer is whatever his normal tempo for a simple bid is — usually around 3 seconds or so.

 

Overcaller has UI from his partner's BIT. It seems to me that when the auction gets back around to him, he has two LAs: pass and 5♥. I don't see double as an LA, but I could be wrong. In any case, if any of these LAs "could demonstrably have been suggested" over another, and the player chooses that LA, and the opponents are damaged, then the score should be adjusted as specified in Law 12. Note "demonstrably" — it's not enough to just assert there was a suggestion, you have to show how the UI suggests whatever. If, OTOH, there the player has no LA to the action he took (5♥ in this case), then he has not violated Law 16 or, for that matter, Law 73C, which says he must carefully avoid taking advantage of any UI from partner.

 

Is 4♥ an underbid? I don't think so, although the hand clearly has a high ODR. OTOH, void in spades I would expect my LHO might well bid 4♠ to extend the preempt. So I might want to bid 5♥ right away instead of 4. No matter, this player didn't.

 

What might advancer's BIT "demonstrably suggest"? Well, even though he passed originally, he might have some defense and so might consider double. He might have some hearts, and so might consider 5♥ himself. I think this is enough to consider either action "could demonstrably have been suggested". Is pass (for overcaller) an LA? That's tougher. 4♠, the way I've seen it most often played, is two way. LHO might be extending the preempt; he might also have a good hand and expect 4♠ to make. I don't know which it is, so I think pass is an LA (a poll would be nice here). So I would adjust, as the table TD apparently did, to 4♠ making.

 

While it is certainly possible for PPs to be issued for tempo violations, I've never seen it done (it may have been done in high level tournaments). Certainly no club level TD around here would give one. Well, I might, in an egregious case where I've already warned the player once — but I would expect to take a lot of flack for it.

 

Laws 73D and F, in combination, would allow a score adjustment if a break in tempo causes a non-offender to draw a false inference, but I don't know if "I didn't have time to find the correct inference" is sufficient to invoke this route to adjustment. That only leaves Law 12A1, and I'm not sure that applies either, since 73D and F do exist. David, what do you think?

 

Further thought: if we go the 73D/F route, there are two offending sides, and that opens a real can of worms, since as we know the laws don't deal well with multiple infractions. :(

[blackshoe]

One other comment: the OP wondered about the ethics of 5♥. I think it should take a pretty serious breach to question a player's ethics. I don't think this case qualifies. Well, maybe if the player is a senior ACBL tournament director, or on the ACBLLC. But I suspect that wasn't the case. B-)

[semeai]

Is 4♥ an underbid? I don't think so, although the hand clearly has a high ODR. OTOH, void in spades I would expect my LHO might well bid 4♠ to extend the preempt. So I might want to bid 5♥ right away instead of 4. No matter, this player didn't.

 

4♥ is wide ranging. and an immediate 5♥ would likely invite 6 in some specific manner (no preempting a preempt), so I don't see what this player not bidding 5 immediately has to do with anything. There are situations where that sort of logic applies, but I don't think this is one.

 

5♥ seems clear to me, with 8 trumps, a void, and no spades. It's definitely a two-way shot, and we could even have both making. (Of course, it's not what I think but what a poll of peers would return.)

[han]

First of all, I think 5H is clear and I don't understand how it can be "remedied". Passing does not seem like a reasonable alternative.

 

The player who bid 4S in a flash violated the rules. This is not the sort of rule that you get a penalty for, but it means that advancer gets more leeway. So if advancer thought for 12 seconds after two flash-bids, then that is not a break in tempo. If advancer thought for 30 seconds, then that certainly constitutes a break in tempo.

 

As said earlier, that doesn't mean overcaller can't bid 5H.

[han]

There should have been a stop card or skip bid warning before the 2♠ bid and the 4♥ bid. So both the 4♥ bidder and the 4♠ bidder should have taken about ten seconds before they called.

 

My understanding of the bridge laws is that you can choose for yourself whether you use the stop-card, and that the opponents have to pause whether you use it or not. Is that correct?

[aguahombre]

My understanding of the bridge laws is that you can choose for yourself whether you use the stop-card, and that the opponents have to pause whether you use it or not. Is that correct?

That is pretty much what happens in ACBL, but I think the stop-card (used or not used) plays a more prominent role in rulings elsewhere.

[blackshoe]

My understanding of the bridge laws is that you can choose for yourself whether you use the stop-card, and that the opponents have to pause whether you use it or not. Is that correct?

 

That is pretty much what happens in ACBL, but I think the stop-card (used or not used) plays a more prominent role in rulings elsewhere.

 

The use of stop cards is a matter of regulation, not law, so what's correct varies from place to place. In England, for example, you put the stop card out, make your bid, and leave the stop card out until you figure ten seconds have gone by. LHO can't call until you pick it up. In North America, you put the stop card out, make your call, and pick up the stop card. LHO is supposed to figure out when ten seconds have gone by himself. In practice, at least in the clubs around here, LHO will bid quickly no matter what you do with the stop card (including if you don't use it at all). The regulation, however, says that you "should" use the stop card, so failure to do so is an infraction of the regulation. The regulation also says that the pause must be made whether you use the stop card or not. As I said, that frequently does not happen. The word "must" here, btw, indicates that if one fails to pause, one should get a PP "more often than not". That doesn't happen either. :-(

 

IMO "the stop card is optional in the ACBL" is one of those myths that arise from time to time. Unfortunately, it's one that's believed not only by players, but also by Tournament Directors. :o :blink:

[barmar]

That is pretty much what happens in ACBL, but I think the stop-card (used or not used) plays a more prominent role in rulings elsewhere.

The hand took place Wednesday night at the ACBL-wide Instant Matchpoint game, so ACBL regulations apply.

 

At my table, the first 3 bids were the same as in the OP, but I saved my partner the problem and raised his hearts to 5. North does have a tough decision, with both good heart support (Qxx) and spade defense (KTxx). I think I took a few seconds, but not too long, for my bid. I don't recall how long the pauses were before the 4♥ and 4♠ bids.

 

Note that if 3rd hand doesn't pause, I wouldn't consider any kind of penalty for a pause by 4th hand. Normally he can use the time while 3rd hand is making his required pause after the skip bid for his own thinking, and I consider him to be "owed" this time if 3rd hand bids too quickly.

[ggwhiz]

Normally he can use the time while 3rd hand is making his required pause after the skip bid for his own thinking, and I consider him to be "owed" this time if 3rd hand bids too quickly.

 

I agree completely.

 

If I was really on the ball in 4th chair I would announce to the table that I'm taking the time you people SHOULD have taken. I'm never on the ball but don't think ethics are in play here.

 

I accept a rollback ruling against me or allowing the 5♥ bid if I'm on the other side. It's that close.

[inquiry]

 

 

Suppose, next, that the tempo of the full auction was as follows:

 

2♠-

immediate flash 4♥-

immediate flash 4♠-

long hesitation pass

 

In other words, the 4♥ call was made with absolutely no 10-second hesitation but was immediate. Also, the 4♠ call was made with no hesitation earlier.

 

How long was "long hesitation pass". Was it 6-10 seconds? If so, no harm and bidding 5♥ is fully allowed without redress in my opinion. The flash pass by LHO does not take away the time the other players (partner and RHO) have to consider the auction. If West had taken his required hesitation, before bidding 4♠, then of course, your partner must bid in tempo. That is my opinion and understanding at least.

[han]

IMO "the stop card is optional in the ACBL" is one of those myths that arise from time to time.

 

 

Aha, I did not know that. The stop card is mandatory but it is essentially meaningless?

 

Also, there are many jumps that I would think do not require a stop card, for example an auction like

 

1S - 2D

2H - 2NT

4NT,

 

does not need a stop card, or does it? Are there guidelines for after which jumps you use a stop card and for which jumps you do not?

 

Does playing with screens have any effect on the rules about stop cards?

[gordontd]

Are there guidelines for after which jumps you use a stop card and for which jumps you do not?

Isn't it simpler just to use the stop card when there's a jump, than to figure out whether this situation is an exception?

 

Does playing with screens have any effect on the rules about stop cards?

Yes, stop cards are not used with screens.

[mgoetze]

Aha, I did not know that. The stop card is mandatory but it is essentially meaningless?

 

That is correct for games under the jurisdiction of the ACBL.