An ethics question

[GaryFisch]

It's an old adage that more hands are lost at trick one than at any other trick. It makes sense for declarer to take time to plan the deal before playing the first card.

 

My question is: If dummy is singleton in the lead suit, does declarer gain an unfair advantage by thinking before playing the only card that can be played? The opponents know that declarer must be planning the hand but can't infer anything else. However, if declarer plays immediately from dummy and then thinks before playing from hand, the opponents might infer something about declarer's hand, especially in NT. They can infer that declarer was considering whether or not to hold up, and decide whether to continue the suit or switch when next on lead based at least in part on this inference. Maybe it's moot in this case though. Declarer's decision will almost always be based on the complete hand, rather than just one suit, so deciding what to play at trick one and planning the hand become synonomous.

 

Are there any established guidelines here? Any thoughts?

[han]

Not only is it ethical to think before playing your singleton at trick 1, it is almost unethical to play the singleton in a split second. By thinking about the whole hand you give 3rd hand the chance to think about the whole hand too, and in particular about what to play at trick 1.

[kenberg]

I can only give my opinion as to how things should be as I am not at all sure how they actually are.

 

I believe that after the dummy hits, there should always be a pause, say 10-12 seconds, before declarer calls for a card. If declarer calls sooner, his opponent should take the time before playing regardless of whether his play is obvious, even if he (third hand) has a stiff.

 

The main sources of advantage in the quick dummy call are these:

 

Declarer hopes to induce a quick play error by third hand

 

Declarer hopes to be able to tell whether third hand has something to think about

 

Declarer hopes to be able to complain that third hand huddled when he had no justification and thereby induced declarer to misplay the hand.

 

 

If third hand is always entitled to think before his play to trick one, regardless of the speed declarer plays and regardless of his holding, then this advantage disappears, as I think it should. Later in the hand there will be huddles and declarer can make of them what he will, but at trick one I believe third hand should always be given time for thought.

 

When pressed for time with an obvious play from dummy, I as declarer will sometimes play quickly. I did that the other night but I immediately apologized to my RHO. I believe there should always be a pause.

 

I am definitely no sort of expert on such matters, but to me this makes sense.

 

Ken

[pclayton]

Even if declarer plays from dummy in a split second, it is still incumbent for 3rd hand to play in normal tempo.

 

If 3rd hand has an 'automatic' play, but wants to think about the entire hand, then the proper thing to do is put the card face down on the table while he thinks.

 

I do believe that if 3rd hand has a problem with his play at T1, that a declarer that plays quickly at T1 SHOULD lose some of the normal protection he would otherwise garner from the defenders UI.

[epeeist]

Deliberate varying the tempo of play to disconcert an opponent appears to violate the ACBL Laws, at least (e.g. Law 74C, 73A [which also notes sponsoring organizations may require pauses e.g. on the 1st trick]).

[Guest Jlall]

Correct. By playing quickly at trick 1, declarer is losing some protection against a third hand huddle. If he thinks for 10-15 seconds, then plays, and RHO tanks he is protected now. Thus declarer is supposed to always think for that amount of time at trick 1. It is not unethical, not to, however but declarer is just damaging himself if he doesn't. All that being said, I often play very quickly at trick 1 (and all other tricks). It's a bad habit, but I feel that since I'm able to play well playing fast, I gain advantage if RHO decides to try to match my speed, or if I am able to deduce RHO has a problem because he thinks. Some say that if he ALWAYS thinks at trick 1, I will gain no advantage, which is true theoretically but in practice not all thinking is created equal. Sometimes they are not thinking too hard, other times they shift in their seats and think very hard. In situations where RHO has a singleton or doubleton then I will pause to protect myself against a slow play from RHO to show a doubleton and a fast play to show a singleton. In more ambiguous situations I sometimes get screwed, but I feel the gain outweighs the risk.

[luis]

No it's not unethical it's not unethical either to play quickly, as it's not unethical for the third hand player to think at trick one with any holding if declarer plays fast, the defender is allowed to plan the defense at trick one.

[kenberg]

Let me pose a spefic hypthetical:

 

We are defending 3NT and partner leads a low card and dummy hits with small cards.

 

Hand 1: I hold Jxx

 

Hand 2: I hold AJx

 

Let's say it is apparent that this suit is where our tricks are.

 

In H1 I play the J and, if it holds, return an x.

 

In H2 I will often play the ace and return the J, but sometimes it is best to play the Jack, AND to do it without making it clear that you hold the ace.

 

 

Assuming that the decision in H2 requires more thought than in H1, is declarer entitled to obtan this information by playing quickly from the dummy at T1?

 

In the plcayton suggested style (if I understand it correctly), with H1 I must detach my J and lay it face down before I do much thinking. This means when the J is played that H1 can be distinguished from H2: In H1 I detach a card and think, in H2 I think and detach a card.

 

In my suggested style, if decarer makes a quick play at T1 then holding either hand, defender detaches nothing until, after a pause, he plays. If he plays the J, H1 and H2 are both possible.

 

As I said, I really don't know the rules here but I have a preference as to how things should be. I would be interested in hearing of other's preferences, and also hearing from those who have more experience than I have regarding the rules. It's possible that the rules require defender to detach a card more or less immediately with H1, in which case it definitely pays for declarer to call for a card as soon as he can get the words (or the mouse click) out.

 

To erase any doubt I mention that this is at T1 only. If at T6 partner leads an x towards my Jxx I certainly am not allowed (in most situations) to stew over the play. I am claiming special status for T1.

 

I assume that this issue is settled as a legal matter since it is hardly novel. I just don't know how the rules read or are interpreted.

 

K

[Guest Jlall]

the defender can and should take the same amount of time with AJx and Jxx. You're allowed to take however long you want (within) reason at trick 1 to think about the whole hand as well as the trick. Declarer can only obtain info about your holding if you as defender play too fast at trick 1. It's up to you to slow it down if declarer plays quickly at trick 1, and if you give anything away from your tempo declarer is certainly entitled to take advantage of it.

[Cascade]

The laws speak of steady tempo as the norm. They allow for a Sponsoring Organization to mandate a pause at trick one - Are there any Sponsoring Organizations that do this?

 

In the absence of a local regulation then deliberately playing fast or slow at trick one subjects you to the consequences of varying your tempo. In particular deliberately slowing down the game because you consider declarer played to quickly at trick one seems to be to be a clear violation of L73D2

 

"A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by means of remark or gesture, through the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a singleton), or by the manner in which the call or play is made."

 

You are entitled to make all calls and plays in "steady tempo and unvarying manner" L73D1 but are obviously allowed to vary from that when you have a problem but only your opponents are entitled to draw inferences from those variations. You should be "particularly careful in positions in which variations may work to the benefit of their side". I would think that this includes when you have an automatic play (singleton etc) at trick one unless your Sponsoring Organization mandates a different tempo at trick one.

 

I know that these views are contrary to the standard practice of many players but they appear to me to be what the Laws state.

[GaryFisch]

I see I've sparked some discussion. It sounds like the answer is to check the tournament rules, and unless otherwise stated, play in tempo. I see how playing fast with a singleton from dummy can pressure the third hand, but it can also pressure declarer where, say declarer wants to steal a trick by playing Q from Qxx opposite Axx, or tempt LHO to cover J w/K crashing on Q, or play a suit where he/she is weak to keep the opponents from playing it. I suspect it's more likely to place the pressure on the third hand.

[luis]

I see I've sparked some discussion. It sounds like the answer is to check the tournament rules, and unless otherwise stated, play in tempo. I see how playing fast with a singleton from dummy can pressure the third hand, but it can also pressure declarer where, say declarer wants to steal a trick by playing Q from Qxx opposite Axx, or tempt LHO to cover J w/K crashing on Q, or play a suit where he/she is weak to keep the opponents from playing it. I suspect it's more likely to place the pressure on the third hand.

This is wrong, you don't have to play in tempo you can think all you want at trick #1 and it does not have anuthing to do with tournament rules.

Your comments about "pressure" just don't apply, there's no such pressure.

[candybar]

I believe that after the dummy hits, there should always be a pause, say 10-12 seconds, before declarer calls for a card. If declarer calls sooner, his opponent should take the time before playing regardless of whether his play is obvious, even if he (third hand) has a stiff.

I did this once, when I was playing in a strange club while on a business trip. My third seat singleton was an ace, and declarer called for small card instantly as the dummy hit the table. I deliberately hesitated for about 5 seconds, then played the ace. Five seconds is not significantly out of tempo, but it was clearly a short time for thought.

 

When I ruffed that suit a couple of tricks later, the opponents were furious, the director was called, the director advised me that it was unethical to hesitate with a singleton unless I said "I have no problem", and after the director left the table, the opponents directly accused me of cheating.

 

I filled out a recorder form and never returned to that club. To this day, I have made a point of hesitating a few seconds whenever the first dummy card is played too quickly.

[Free]

During the first trick and before your first card, you have a reason to think: you want to plan the defense. This has nothing to do with hesitating to play a singleton. There's a lot to do, for example counting HCP's. My experience: only low-level players will complain about such things in 1st trick since they don't understand why someone would think about a suit which isn't played, so don't worry too much :P

 

I always wait before playing my first card, to protect both myself and the opponents. I don't want to draw conclusions out of hesitations or quick play at that point, and if I play immediatly I just might do it anyway (I know myself)...

There was a time when I had to teach one of my partners not to play his singleton when he was dummy. Everytime he did it anyway, I looked mad at him and said "low plz" after a while. Now he doesn't do it anymore and opponents can't draw conclusions out of quick play anymore. :D

[mikestar]

Perhaps the next revison of the laws should mandate pauses at trick 1 rather than leaving it up to sponsoring organizations. Declarer clearly has a right to plan the play of the hand at the first point he can do so--when the dummy hits. Third hand must be given the same opportunity and must be allowed the chance to think before his own play if declarer calls a card quickly. Opening leader will also need to do some planning during this time, as the sight of the dummy often invalidates his pre lead thinking.

 

Dummy needs this time to plan what to complain about in declarer's play :P

 

 

Since I have become skilled enough to realize how unfair to the defense a quick play from the dummy can be, I have always endevored to pause for a resonable length of time. On the rare occasions I slip, I apologize to third hand and tell him to take all the time he needs. I'm not saying this is legally required, but is simply an application of Active Ethics (and the Golden Rule, for that matter.)

[keylime]

I admit that I am a very fast player at the table live. It's simply because my brain works at that rate of speed - there are many hands I can think of where I am already at trick 6-7 by the time I call for dummy for the first time.

 

I admittedly have received many, many gifts due to the sheer pace of my declaring. If memory serves, Lauria or Versace is similar in the rate of play once they make a plan.

 

I think mandating a pause at trick 1 would bring balance. I also think that it would result in less tempo problems.

 

With that said, something needs to be done about the slow play epidemic.

[luke warm]

With that said, something needs to be done about the slow play epidemic

there are time limits, no? bridge is one of a group of games that require thought.. just because some people can form the correct plan quicker, or believe they can, has no bearing on the issue... fischer was able to play chess very quickly, and at a very high level... kasparov, while also a fast player, doesn't play at fischer's speed yet plays at an even greater skill level...

 

i've seen many world class players on bbo, some of whom play much faster than others... i've seen fred take as much time as he needs to play a hand... i don't see anything at all wrong with that, as long as the time limits already in place are observed

 

now some will probably say that there's a difference between an average player like me wanting to spend time thinking, and a world class player like fred... that's only true insofar as his goals are different from mine... he might want to win the bermuda bowl, i might only want to play my very best... the importance attached to each goal is relative

 

i personally play my best when i'm allowed time to think.. but when rude and/or clueless opps string together !!!!!!!!! or .........., or when a stigma is attached to thinking, it's very hard to take that time

[kfgauss]

I admit that I am a very fast player at the table live. It's simply because my brain works at that rate of speed - there are many hands I can think of where I am already at trick 6-7 by the time I call for dummy for the first time.

 

I admittedly have received many, many gifts due to the sheer pace of my declaring. If memory serves, Lauria or Versace is similar in the rate of play once they make a plan.

 

I think mandating a pause at trick 1 would bring balance. I also think that it would result in less tempo problems.

 

With that said, something needs to be done about the slow play epidemic.

I tend to play at a "deliberate" pace (read: moderate to slow) and must admit I'm a big fan of slow play. When playing quickly, I can form a reasonable plan, but I enjoy the game much less because there's less subtelty and actually thought-out deduction.

 

Perhaps you mean you take a good chunk of time at trick one and then have most of the board worked out, but from your "slow play epidemic" comment, I'd guess/assume you only take a little time at the start and don't pause for thought for very long when an interesting point or tough decision specifically comes up. I haven't seen you play, but I doubt your play is at the level of Lauria and Versace (don't take this the wrong way: clearly almost nobody's is) and you'd probably pick up on more stuff if you took a little longer occasionally. Try playing more deliberately (this isn't meant at all to sound patronizing: we presumably play the game with slightly different attitudes and this comment in no way is meant to imply that I think I play the cards better than you do) and see whether you pick up on more stuff and how you like it.

 

As for playing quickly inducing mistakes by your opponents (because you're more used to it or better suited for it or whatever than they are), yes, this does happen. The defenders can/should keep their own normal pace, but it is sometimes hard and requires a bit of conscious thought. I'm not advocating not playing quickly sometimes to induce mistakes/etc, but rather taking more time initially and pausing when it's warranted and there's an interesting problem, and perhaps trying experimental sessions where you try to think a lot and don't worry about inducing mistakes (which might not be how you'd play if you were doing your utmost to win).

 

Andy

[GaryFisch]

I see I've sparked some discussion.  It sounds like the answer is to check the tournament rules, and unless otherwise stated, play in tempo.  I see how playing fast with a singleton from dummy can pressure the third hand, but it can also pressure declarer where, say declarer wants to steal a trick by playing Q from Qxx opposite Axx, or tempt LHO to cover J w/K crashing on Q, or play a suit where he/she is weak to keep the opponents from playing it.  I suspect it's more likely to place the pressure on the third hand.

This is wrong, you don't have to play in tempo you can think all you want at trick #1 and it does not have anuthing to do with tournament rules.

Your comments about "pressure" just don't apply, there's no such pressure.

It indeed can pressure the third hand if the singleton is played quickly, because declarer can draw an inference from any delay by that hand; whereas, if declarer takes time to play from dummy, third hand can spend that time planning the play. Also, if 3rd hand then plays quickly, the defense can draw an inference from any delay by declarer which they can't do on a delay to play a singleton from dummy.

[GaryFisch]

It sounds like people have gotten off topic and onto the subject of slow play in general. Well, ok, if you want to talk about that, I think most complaints about slow play have nothing to do with inferences, pressure, or deception, and everything to do with someone wanting the hand to move along. Well, fine, I like a hand to move along, but some hands deserve more time than others.

 

I remember one time a BBO opponent stated that thinking for too long is cheating. He then chatted, "Bye, cheaters" and left the table. Needless to say I was upset by this and reported that player.

[mgoetze]

The laws speak of steady tempo as the norm. They allow for a Sponsoring Organization to mandate a pause at trick one - Are there any Sponsoring Organizations that do this?

In Germany, such a pause is not exactly "mandated", but 10 seconds are, well, strongly suggested, and declarer forfeits protection against UI from the tempo of 3rd hand's play if he does not take so long.