It look like UI

[barmar]

If they don't agree about the BIT and its 2-2 you need to look at the slow bidder hand its the main way to break the equality and decide if there is a BIT or not.

What you seem to be saying is that if you think YOU would have hesitated with that hand, you're going to rule that he actually did hesitate. That seems like a poor way to rule. What makes you think your bridge ability is comparable to that player's, so you can put yourself in his position? Unless the hand is MSC-level difficulty, I don't think this is likely to be a good decision.

 

A slightly better method might be to poll players with the hand and see if they're able to answer quickly. In this case you don't actually care what they decide to bid, just how long they take. But the artificial setting of a poll may bias the result -- since they know they're being polled, they're likely to think extra hard about it before answering.

[Aardv]

I think I'm in the minority here, but I believe the actual hand should matter. It's usually daft to rule that a hesitation could demonstrably have suggested that a player is at one end of his range when the evidence of the current hand is that it suggests he's at the opposite end of his range.

[Vampyr]

I think I'm in the minority here, but I believe the actual hand should matter. It's usually daft to rule that a hesitation could demonstrably have suggested that a player is at one end of his range when the evidence of the current hand is that it suggests he's at the opposite end of his range.

 

Well, you may have to consider frequencies, and in this case, the fact that the opener admitted to having used the UI.

 

In any case, I strongly agree with post #18.