Class of players

[schulken]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj864hkjt52dj43ck&w=sat7h76d987caqjt5&n=sk52ha9843d62c932&e=sq93hqdakqt5c8764&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1d1h2c4hppdppp]399|300[/hv]

 

ACBL. Club game. NS B pair v. EW C pair. Strata open/1500/750. As you have probably already guessed (otherwise there wouldn’t be an issue), E hesitated prior to his pass. NS complained that W should not X as E’s hesitation provided unauthorized information. With a dearth of B and C players, I added A players to those that I polled. One A player who played W and had passed as dealer said he wouldn’t double: not knowing much about the quality of his partner’s third-seat opener, he had nothing else to say. The other A players said they would have opened the W hand with 1♣. They then said they absolutely would have doubled 4♥, two saying they were not about to let NS steal their contract for free.

 

Here’s my concern. Law 16B.1.(b) defines a logical alternative action as being one that, among the class of players in question (my emphasis), would be given serious consideration by a significant portion of such players. What is still gnawing at me a bit is that the players I polled who said they would double 4♥ also said they would have opened the W hand with 1♣. If the law requires us to use as "the class of players" those who wouldn’t open the W hand, should we therefore conclude those players are by their nature so conservative in their bidding they would pass 4♥ without the UI? Would all players who passed the W hand fail to double 4♥? The player in question was the only player I polled who passed as W who also said it was an easy double for him with two aces and his partner opening. W’s partner opened in the third seat, so I’m not sure partner opening gives you much comfort - it could be 10 across from your 11. The preempt by N causes me to believe N doesn’t have much of a hand, but S could have an opening hand - indeed perhaps as many as 16 HCP, as an unpassed overcaller. Certainly less since E opened, but W would know from his hand that S could still have 11-12. Is knowing your side has half the points or more enough to make you double a major suit game contract? With two aces and N’s preempt, I’d be inclined to say probably. We may not have a game but they probably don’t either.

 

Regardless, we let the table result of 4♥X off 2 stand. It was above average for EW. Three pairs found a ♣ or ♦ game, three played in a ♣ or ♦ partscore, one played in 4♥ not doubled off 2, and one EW knucklehead tried 3NT which went off 1 - not sure which one promised a ♥ stopper.

 

Let me know what you think.

[pran]

Before going any further TD must establish whether North obeyed the STOP regulation in force. East is certainly allowed 10 Seconds to consider his action over the 4♥ bid. If North failed to use STOP properly then that is end of story, no adjustment.

 

Next, considering the auction: East opened the auction and West himself is close to having opening values. I wouldn't critisize West for not opening, but the auction itself, and particularly the situation after the 4♥ bid yells for some action by West, either a bid or a double.

 

I don't think I would have assigned an adjusted score here.

[mink]

I agree with what Pran said. Furthermore, if I were West, I would have no idea if the my partner was thinking about penalty, raise the clubs or even rebid the diamonds. Therefore, no valuable information is passed, and the pause did not suggest anything specific.

 

Karl

[bixby]

Before going any further TD must establish whether North obeyed the STOP regulation in force. East is certainly allowed 10 Seconds to consider his action over the 4♥ bid. If North failed to use STOP properly then that is end of story, no adjustment.

 

Next, considering the auction: East opened the auction and West himself is close to having opening values. I wouldn't critisize West for not opening, but the auction itself, and particularly the situation after the 4♥ bid yells for some action by West, either a bid or a double.

 

I don't think I would have assigned an adjusted score here.

 

Pran, do you really mean "If North failed to use STOP properly then that is end of story, no adjustment"? What if North fails to use the STOP card but East takes 90 seconds to pass? Assuming adjustment is otherwise appropriate, I can't agree that North's failure to use the STOP card forfeits N/S's right to an adjustment -- certainly not under ACBL regs.

[Bbradley62]

Speaking as a non-A player, I would have duplicated all three of West's calls, and I think the last two were obvious. (Not letting opps steal from us was exactly my thought.)

 

You must have a remarkably strong club game if you can't omit 1500+ players from a poll when evaluating the action of a 750- player.

[aguahombre]

Passing 4H might be an alternative a bad "C" might choose, but it is not logical.

 

Doubling 4H is probably the only alternative a "B" would have.

 

A "B" would probably only choose 4S, 4N, or 5C if he were attempting to use the UI.

 

East had no UI for his unsuccessful (wrong, IMO) decision to sit for the double instead of bidding 5C. So, I don't see the basis for any adjustment.

 

Side note: polling "A" players for consensus about what a lower class of player would think or do is just fine. We have vetted this issue on BBF, but it has been a while.

Edited April 23, 2014 by aguahombre

[pran]

Pran, do you really mean "If North failed to use STOP properly then that is end of story, no adjustment"? What if North fails to use the STOP card but East takes 90 seconds to pass? Assuming adjustment is otherwise appropriate, I can't agree that North's failure to use the STOP card forfeits N/S's right to an adjustment -- certainly not under ACBL regs.

Be aware that the purpose of the STOP procedure is to protect the skip bidder from opponents passing UI because of varying hesitation in a situation where an opponent will most likely need some time to consider his action.

 

If the skip bidder fails to use STOP properly he forfeits this protection, so only in extreme situations should an adjustment be considered in such cases.

[Vampyr]

Be aware that the purpose of the STOP procedure is to protect the skip bidder from opponents passing UI because of varying hesitation in a situation where an opponent will most likely need some time to consider his action.

 

If the skip bidder fails to use STOP properly he forfeits this protection, so only in extreme situations should an adjustment be considered in such cases.

 

I agree; the player considering his action should not also be responsible for making sure that his hesitation is 10 seconds.

[paulg]

In my experience a C player would look at the two aces and partner's opening bid and double any C, B or perceived weak A player without hesitation. They tend not to double strong A players, but even here two aces gives them a chance for a rare good score and may still double.

[gordontd]

I'd like to find out more about EW's methods. In my experience players who pass hands like the West one (especially players in the ACBL) are inclined to expect less of their partner's third in hand openings. If East might open that hand with the ♦A replaced with the ♦J, then it becomes a bit less clear to double 4♥.

[ArtK78]

I cannot imagine any player of any class passing out 4♥. If anything, the hesitation suggests further action other than double.

[pran]

I agree; the player considering his action should not also be responsible for making sure that his hesitation is 10 seconds.

The Norwegian STOP regulation stipulates that it is the responsibility of the skip bidder to time the duration of the STOP periode (with the exception that if he indicates end of the STOP period before ten seconds have elapsed the period shall be extended for a total duration not less than ten seconds).

 

I have heard that this is different in ACBL?

[billw55]

Regardless, we let the table result of 4♥X off 2 stand. It was above average for EW. Three pairs found a ♣ or ♦ game, three played in a ♣ or ♦ partscore, one played in 4♥ not doubled off 2, and one EW knucklehead tried 3NT which went off 1 - not sure which one promised a ♥ stopper.

Perhaps the NS knuckleheads never entered the auction.

 

Anyway, no adjustment. I don't see how double is suggested, or that there is any LA anyway.

[barmar]

I have heard that this is different in ACBL?

It is. In ACBL, you must hesitate 10 seconds after a skip bid regardless of whether your RHO used the STOP card.

 

The original post says ACBL, so the STOP card is effectively irrelevant. All that matters is whether East's hesitation is significantly longer than 10 seconds.

[schulken]

Passing 4H might be an alternative a bad "C" might choose, but it is not logical.

 

Doubling 4H is probably the only alternative a "B" would have.

 

A "B" would probably only choose 4S, 4N, or 5C if he were attempting to use the UI.

 

East had no UI for his unsuccessful (wrong, IMO) decision to sit for the double instead of bidding 5C. So, I don't see the basis for any adjustment.

 

Side note: polling "A" players for consensus about what a lower class of player would think or do is just fine. We have vetted this issue on BBF, but it has been a while.

Thanks for the side note. This is exactly what I was looking for.

[schulken]

Passing 4H might be an alternative a bad "C" might choose, but it is not logical.

 

Doubling 4H is probably the only alternative a "B" would have.

 

A "B" would probably only choose 4S, 4N, or 5C if he were attempting to use the UI.

 

East had no UI for his unsuccessful (wrong, IMO) decision to sit for the double instead of bidding 5C. So, I don't see the basis for any adjustment.

 

Side note: polling "A" players for consensus about what a lower class of player would think or do is just fine. We have vetted this issue on BBF, but it has been a while.

Thanks for the side note. This is exactly what I was looking for.

[aguahombre]

It is. In ACBL, you must hesitate 10 seconds after a skip bid regardless of whether your RHO used the STOP card.

 

The original post says ACBL, so the STOP card is effectively irrelevant. All that matters is whether East's hesitation is significantly longer than 10 seconds.

Actually what matters in determining whether there was a break in tempo is whether there was a break in tempo; I don't think an exact number of seconds is important any more.

 

However, in this case, the hesitation doesn't seem to matter at all to West's Double.

[schulken]

Perhaps the NS knuckleheads never entered the auction.

 

Anyway, no adjustment. I don't see how double is suggested, or that there is any LA anyway.

Fair point.

[barmar]

Actually what matters in determining whether there was a break in tempo is whether there was a break in tempo; I don't think an exact number of seconds is important any more.

But since you're supposed to wait about 10 seconds after a skip bid, that initial period is considered "free".

 

Ideally, if someone habitually fails to obey the skip bid requirement to wait, we should consider any pause to be a tempo break (that's more in keeping with the tempo law). But I don't think that's how the skip bid regulation is generally interpreted.

[ArtK78]

ACBL Land:

 

I have used the skip bid warning verbally and then, with the advent of bidding boxes, I have used the STOP card, religiously since the skip bid warning was first instituted. In many cases, this has little effect on my LHO, who usually acts immediately.

 

Many players will wait until you remove the STOP card from the table before acting, but they make it clear that the only reason that they are not acting is because you haven't removed the STOP card.

 

Most players are completely ignorant to the fact that they are required to pause approximately 10 seconds after a skip bid (whether weak or strong or otherwise) whether the STOP card has been used or not. Of course, on the flip side, many players are completely ignorant to the fact that they are supposed to use the STOP card whenever they skip a level of bidding, whether their bid is weak, strong or something else.

 

And, of course, most players are completely ignorant of the fact that they are conveying UI when they make it clear that they are just waiting for you to remove your STOP card.

 

But, other than ranting about it, there is not a whole lot one can do.

[WellSpyder]

But, other than ranting about it, there is not a whole lot one can do.

In England, where at least some players try to follow the stop bid regulations, I regularly turn at the end of the auction to players whose partners have passed or bid immediately after a stop bid and ask whether they agree that their partner did not wait before calling (my partners all leave out the stop card for at least a few seconds, so these are all before the stop card has been removed). It is just like establishing any other break in tempo really, and I would be happy to do the equivalent of asking "do you agree your partner showed that they weren't thinking during the pause?". I don't think I have yet called a TD at the end of the hand to ask for a ruling about the UI conveyed by a failure to pause before passing, but I have certainly considered it.

[WellSpyder]

Sorry - duplicate. (I see now how easy it is to do this when the system hangs or times out.)

[mycroft]

The first thing we need to find out to determine the "class of players involved" is what E-W's ideas of a third seat opener may be. Monsterpoints are a last ditch guide to how experienced players are - but actual knowledge of the pair, and questions asked of the pair's agreements, are a higher priority guide.

 

If this is a typical C pair - "we play Drury because partner could have a weak 3rd seat opener; but we'd never open KT862 8 AJ95 Q43 or KT86 87 AJ95 Q43 or KT862 - AJ95 9432 1♠ in third seat - they don't even have 11 points!" - then there is no LA, for that class of player, to double by a hand with two aces and an absolute max. This is *not* making.

 

If this is a B (C, in that field, if we're stratifying by average) pair like mine, where with two bullets and a 4243, after p-p-1♥-1NT, the TD gets called because I pass without even thinking - and it's right! - in the NABC Swiss, then maybe there's an LA to pass, because now East has said with the hesitation (assuming we are going to take the BIT as agreed) that she *doesn't* have any of those zero-trick hands, KQJ8 7 QT85 9865 or the like, that she could have. (I will admit that in this partnership, I would not pass with the West hand - it's a 12-14 1NT opener. But if I couldn't do that because I was 3=1=4=5 or the like, we have to pass, so there I am, deciding what to do after 4♥-p-p).

 

BBradley, if this is the game I think it is, then absolutely it's a remarkably strong club game. I was happy to break average (with, to give me credit, a pickup partner) when I played in it.

[aguahombre]

But since you're supposed to wait about 10 seconds after a skip bid, that initial period is considered "free".

 

Ideally, if someone habitually fails to obey the skip bid requirement to wait, we should consider any pause to be a tempo break (that's more in keeping with the tempo law). But I don't think that's how the skip bid regulation is generally interpreted.

Oh, I think we both know what we mean and what we agree is one of those tempo breaks which creates UI. We just are using different definitions.

 

Habitually failing to pause at all after a skip bid is a tempo break (from what is required). deviating from our own normal pace is a tempo break. IMO, in a complicated uncontested auction, a break in tempo by one member of the bidding side should NEVER be considered to convey UI....well maybe with the exception of hesitation Blackwood.

[barmar]

Sorry - duplicate. (I see now how easy it is to do this when the system hangs or times out.)

Something's going on with the forum today, it's getting lots of "Gateway Timeout" errors when posting. We're looking into it.

 

But the message always seems to get posted -- the error is apparently happening when it tries to refresh, so don't retry. Just go back to the forum and you'll see the message is there.