when is it right to thinkg?

[Fluffy]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj864ha4dt8652ck4&e=sak3h875da3cqj953&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1cp1hd1n2s3hp4hppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Partner led ♦Q and I had to think about raising with ♥A in order to play ♣K praying for partner to have exactly ♣Axx

 

Should I play before playing to first trick, after playing for first trick but without turning my card or perhaps neither, only allowed to think when dummy leads a heart after.

 

 

What actually hapened at the table was that I had my low diamond still face up when declarer put the trick down and asked for a heart from dummy wich dummy played.

 

I realiced if I was to duck this trick I had to do it inmediatelly so I turned my diamond face down and played my low heart as quick as I could. Declarer took a moment but finally played ♥J losing to partner's ♥Qx with a look like said something like "I knew it". I wasn't happy at all how te things developed and almost costed me the contract. Raising and playing ♣K would also work since partner has ♥Q10 and ♣Axx.

[barmar]

When dummy comes down, you should take whatever time you need to plan the defense, to better ensure that you can play in tempo later. Some RAs have explicit regulations saying that thinking at trick 1 should be considered normal tempo, not a hesitation.

[guido]

I suggest that ALWAYS taking time to think about the hand after dummy comes down is a good idea. As third hand, this not only assists in not giving declarer information by hesitating later in the play when she/he can draw a useful inference but also protects you from giving your partner UI. As declarer, I also suggest you take a little time before playing from dummy.

[blackshoe]

I've been trying to get my novice partner to plan the play at trick one. Nope. Play quickly to the first trick, tank on the second trick, tank on the third trick... Drives me nuts.

 

Post mortem: "What was your plan?" "I didn't have one." "Why not?" "Um... I'll remember next time." Uh, huh. Right. :blink:

[Fluffy]

But should I think before or after playing to trick one?

[Mbodell]

Before.

 

At least here (ACBL) that is the guidance. I must admit as dummy I get annoyed when some of my partners could win trick 1 in either hand, but win the trick pretty quickly, and then think a while before playing to trick 2.

[quiddity]

I usually try to play to the first trick in tempo and then leave the card face up. Breaking tempo after dummy plays can get awkward, imo.

[PrecisionL]

Another possibility if you do NOT have to decide what to play on trick one (win, duck, or signal):

 

Place your card face-down on the table and then think about the defense after trick one and possibly announce your are planning the defense.

 

My regular tournament partner and I announce that 3rd hand ALWAYS pauses at trick one to plan the defense!

[aguahombre]

But should I think before or after playing to trick one?

Dunno, in Spain; however:

 

Before.

 

At least here (ACBL) that is the guidance. I must admit as dummy I get annoyed when some of my partners could win trick 1 in either hand, but win the trick pretty quickly, and then think a while before playing to trick 2.

These statements are: first one, true...second one a shared annoyance.

 

Then, comes:

I usually try to play to the first trick in tempo and then leave the card face up. Breaking tempo after dummy plays can get awkward, imo.

I do not know Quiddity's jurisdiction, so this might be just fine. But in the ACBL where Mike's "guidance" is appropriate, there is a different (obscure) definition of what playing to the first trick in tempo means.

 

If I play as quickly to the first trick as I would "in tempo" thereafter, then leave the card face up to stall things, it is still uncomfortable and awkward. I have now disclosed UI that I had no problem at trick one but still want to think about later stuff. That is more information to partner and to the opponents than I wish to convey.

[nigel_k]

Nobody really maintains an even tempo in the play. Sometimes you need to think and sometimes you don't. Trick one is usually a good time to think, but it's fine to do it later or not all if no problems come up. What annoys me is when partner thinks for a long time, plays a card and everyone follows low or something, then he starts thinking again. If you're going to take up all that time, at least have a plan at the end of it.

[fromageGB]

Place your card face-down on the table and then think about the defense after trick one and possibly announce your are planning the defense.

This is my preference. By playing the first card in normal tempo, but not facing it, you are obviously not "hesitating" but thinking about the whole hand. However, this does show declarer that you have something to think about, and he might make a correct decision based on that. Better to play a reasonable tempo while still thinking, even if the first card is obvious take 4 or 5 seconds over playing it while you contemplate later action.

[gnasher]

What actually hapened at the table was that I had my low diamond still face up when declarer put the trick down and asked for a heart from dummy wich dummy played.

 

I realiced if I was to duck this trick I had to do it inmediatelly so I turned my diamond face down and played my low heart as quick as I could.

Why did you do that? By doing this, you let an opponent bully you into playing before you were ready. You should never let the opponents control your tempo.

 

I would just ignore declarer's antics, leave my card face-up, and continue to think until I was ready to play. If he tried to hassle me, I'd ask to see trick one again. I'd do this regardless of whether I was actually thinking about trick two or about the later play, so he wouldn't know if I had the ace or not.

[gnasher]

If declarer plays from dummy after a reasonable pause, I usually play immediately.

 

If declarer plays quickly from dummy, I take my time before playing, even if I have an automatic play.

 

If I want to hold up play whilst I think about the hand in general, I play to the trick and then leave my card face up on the table. Declarer can do what he likes, but neither I nor my partner will play to the next trick until we've both finished with the current one.

 

I don't like it when people play a card face-down and then think. It means that they are able to think about the hand with the knowledge of what card they're going to play, so they are able to use the time more effectivley than anyone else.

[Fluffy]

Why did you do that?

Cos I had to act quickly and made that decision

By doing this, you let an opponent bully you into playing before you were ready. You should never let the opponents control your tempo.

I wasn't happy about this and I would want a method to prevent this. So far I like the most the idea of playing first trick face down, at least when its a pip that doens't matter.

IIf declarer plays quickly from dummy, I take my time before playing, even if I have an automatic play

If I want to hold up play whilst I think about the hand in general, I play to the trick and then leave my card face up on the table. Declarer can do what he likes, but neither I nor my partner will play to the next trick until we've both finished with the current one.

That's good, I might work on doing this.

[aguahombre]

I would just ignore declarer's antics, leave my card face-up, and continue to think until I was ready to play. If he tried to hassle me, I'd ask to see trick one again. I'd do this regardless of whether I was actually thinking about trick two or about the later play, so he wouldn't know if I had the ace or not.

We had this on another thread a few months ago. Gnasher's way of handling it is as right now as it was then.

[Statto]

I would just ignore declarer's antics, leave my card face-up, and continue to think until I was ready to play. If he tried to hassle me, I'd ask to see trick one again. I'd do this regardless of whether I was actually thinking about trick two or about the later play, so he wouldn't know if I had the ace or not.

Declarer can play the next trick whether you've turned the card face down or not. Keeping the card face up means you can ask to see the previous trick, but not if partner has already played to the next trick.

 

So I wonder if the fact that you kept the card face up would make any difference with respect to AI or UI from the break in tempo on trick 2...?

[blackshoe]

In club bridge, there is really only one practical way to deal with problems like this — if the players won't give you time to think at trick one, quit playing at that club. If the director rules "BIT, UI", don't play at that club. Frankly, if it's the only club in town, I'd just flat quit playing. I decided twenty years ago that I'd already put up with enough crap in my life. I ain't putting up with any more.

[gnasher]

Declarer can play the next trick whether you've turned the card face down or not. Keeping the card face up means you can ask to see the previous trick, but not if partner has already played to the next trick.

 

So I wonder if the fact that you kept the card face up would make any difference with respect to AI or UI from the break in tempo on trick 2...?

If you make it obvious that you're thinking, that conveys the UI that you have something to think about. The exact time at which you think can have small effects on exactly what UI is conveyed:

 

- If you think at the end of the trick (ie you play face-up, leave your card face-up, think, and then turn it over), it says that your thought was not about your play to trick one.

 

- If you think before LHO has played (eg you place your card face-down, think, and then face it), it says that your thought was not about your play to trick one, and also that your thought was unaffected by what declarer was going to play to trick one.

 

- If you think before playing to the trick, it conceals whether you were thinking about this trick or a later one. However, if partner realises that you're not thinking about trick one, it says that your thought was unaffected by what declarer was going to play to trick one. More important, thinking at this point may mislead declarer, which is against the rules.

[gnasher]

In club bridge, there is really only one practical way to deal with problems like this — if the players won't give you time to think at trick one, quit playing at that club. If the director rules "BIT, UI", don't play at that club. Frankly, if it's the only club in town, I'd just flat quit playing. I decided twenty years ago that I'd already put up with enough crap in my life. I ain't putting up with any more.

I don't understand. How can the opponents control how long I spend thinking? If declarer plays too quickly at trick one, I take correspondingly longer at trick one. If I want time to think before playing to trick two, I take it.

[Vampyr]

I don't understand. How can the opponents control how long I spend thinking? If declarer plays too quickly at trick one, I take correspondingly longer at trick one. If I want time to think before playing to trick two, I take it.

 

blackshoe is suggesting that if you do this, you may be ruled against.

[Zelandakh]

blackshoe is suggesting that if you do this, you may be ruled against.

I suspect Andy is used to playing with competent Directors. You always have a good "bridge reason" to think at trick 1.

[Vampyr]

I suspect Andy is used to playing with competent Directors. You always have a good "bridge reason" to think at trick 1.

 

By "you" I didn't mean Andy personally. I was just trying to explain what I thought blackshoe was trying to say.