Simple BIT ruling

[lmilne]

Not sure if this belongs here or Simple Rulings - tell me what you think.

 

West opens 1♠, North passes, East raises to 3♠ (alerted and explained as weak/preemptive) with ♠Kxxxx ♥xx ♦Qxxx ♣xx.

 

South overcalls 4♥ and West, after a decent pause for thought, doubles (EW have no special agreement on the double but it isn't for takeout). East ripped it to 4♠ which worked better than passing would have.

 

NS call you to the table and suggest that the 4♠ bid might have been suggested by the break in tempo before the double. No dispute on the BIT. Your ruling?

[trevahound]

I can't make a ruling until I poll it. I find a few similar players to E, and give them their hand and the auction with perfect tempo by everyone. If E's are passing the perfect tempo double, or most are at least seriously considering it (I suspect most pass the double), I adjust. Slow doubles usually express doubts about defending, in my experience, but I won't know if passing is a LA without a some questioning of others blinded to the problem.

[TylerE]

What exactly was a "decent pause"? When the opponents enter the auction for the first time at the 4-level I don't think 10-15 seconds would be excessive.

[gnasher]

What exactly was a "decent pause"? When the opponents enter the auction for the first time at the 4-level I don't think 10-15 seconds would be excessive.

As always, what matters is whether the pause is normal. If West always takes 10-15 seconds in this type of situation, the pause doesn't convey UI. If he sometimes acts quickly and sometimes doesn't, the pause does convey UI.

[pran]

Sigh.

 

We have no problem In Norway (and certainly not only in Norway) with this:

 

Once both sides have participated in the auction at the two-level or higher with call(s) other than pass there is a compulsory STOP-pause with each and every call other than pass if either opponent called (other than pass) in the last previous round of the auction.

 

So under our regulation the player who bid 4♥ without announcing STOP would have committed an irregularity.

 

And I consider this a very good regulation!

[lamford]

We assume that the BIT is agreed, as stated in the OP, and it therefore longer than normal. The only card justifying bidding 4S is the fifth trump, but Pass must be an LA, and I would expect to adjust after conducting a poll of peers of East.

[helene_t]

Dbl opposite a preempt is normally penalty so it is very unlikely that pass isn't an LA

[blackshoe]

If we accept the BIT as given, then pass is likely an LA, and the BIT might well suggest bidding on, so I would adjust. Like others, though, I'm not so sure about that BIT and would want more information on it. Whether use of the stop card is relevant depends on Australian regulations, and I'm not familiar with those, so I'd want more on that, too. B-)

[sfi]

Use of the stop card is unheard of in Australia.

[blackshoe]

Use of the stop card is unheard of in Australia.

That doesn't surprise me, whatever the regulations say. B-)

[Vampyr]

And I consider this a very good regulation!

 

Yeah, I like this regulation a lot too.

[pran]

Yeah, I like this regulation a lot too.

And while we are at it, be aware that it is the player who is responsible for announcing STOP who is also responsible for announcing the expiration of the STOP period. (And that if he announces such expiration before 10 Seconds have elapsed then his LHO is free to call immediately or still spend the full 10 seconds thinking.)

[Vampyr]

And while we are at it, be aware that it is the player who is responsible for announcing STOP who is also responsible for announcing the expiration of the STOP period. (And that if he announces such expiration before 10 Seconds have elapsed then his LHO is free to call immediately or still spend the full 10 seconds thinking.)

 

Well, we at least have that.

[mycroft]

Vul would be useful here :-).

 

I'd do the polling as well (and I bet that East is one of those "permanent flight C" players that do not, and likely will never, think past their own bid, but):

 

This hand is a perfect example of the "if you were going to do it anyway, why did you not do it immediately?" type. Yes, there are legitimate reasons to do it (and most of them get hit with "well, partner just took away your ability to be brilliant"), but, were I a mentor of East, and there was no BIT involved, my argument would be:

 

"So, what do you have for your 0-6, 4+ trumps that you haven't already shown?" and

"If you were always going to bid 4♠ over 4♥, why didn't you do it immediately? It's almost certain that they're going to bid it."

 

If they argue that the fifth spade makes it more likely that there's a spade void, and so that one trick West is expecting isn't coming, okay - I don't think it's reason to pull the double, but it's at least a valid reason. But East has passed Captaincy with his preemptive raise, and there's no reason to believe that both 4-level contracts are not going down. Partner will be *very happy* when his -500 into nothing just got turned into less than nothing; but of course he doesn't have the "auto 500" (or if he does, it's the "auto 500" that might make 620 with the right preemptive raise), or there wouldn't have been that pause, would there?

 

Unless the poll gives me totally different answers, this looks like a really good time to educate East on UI restrictions and "partner removing your ability to guess right" (as well as being the correct ruling).