[swanway]

---

After East had bid 4S South hesitated for quite a long time and then passed. At the end of the bidding East called the Director and stated that he wanted to reserve his rights because of the hesitation by South. At this stage all the players agreed that there had been a hesitation. East then played the hand and went down 3 doubled for a score of 800 to N/S. East called the Director and said he had been damaged by the hesitation and he wanted an adjusted score.

I was not playing that night but I have been asked to comment on this problem. At first I thought that East might have been damaged but I believe many players would have bid 5H when the vulnerability was in their favour. North could expect to go off three doubled for 500 with the expectation that EW would score 650.

I was also wondering if East could be guilty of a 'wild and gambling' bid. I am not familar with this law and I would welcome your comments.

I have just looked at the preview and it does not show that the 5S bid by East was doubled by South.
Please would you note this error when considering your judgement.

[bluejak]

The 5♠ bid on Q76432 is certainly wild: it is certainly gambling: it looks very much like a double shot attempt. Note that if East had passed 5♠ by West would be a much more reasonable bid: he knows there is a spade fit.

[lamford]

It looks normal to take some action on the North hand, and the alternative is double, which South will pass for +500. It is not clear whether bidding on or doubling is demonstrably suggested by the BIT either, although taking some action is, and I would poll 10 players to check that they nearly all bid something. East's 5S bid does look egregious and I would be inclined to leave the score unaltered.

[jallerton]

Quote

It looks normal to take some action on the North hand, and the alternative is double

Double seems a bit rich with a 9-card suit. If partner can't double 4♠, then it is very likely to be making; and with a 9-card suit and eight "clear cut tricks", saving in 5♥ looks normal to me at this vulnerability.

Quote

It is not clear whether bidding on or doubling is demonstrably suggested by the BIT

I agree.

Quote

I would poll 10 players to check that they nearly all bid something

I would poll 10 players to check which call(s) they seriously considered.

[Cascade]

5♠ is nonsense.

All other actions seem reasonably normal to me.

Other points of interest:

1. I would expect south's tempo to be slowish here often. If stop cards are used then there is a good case to extend their use to all first and maybe even second round actions in competitive auctions of this type. Even without that sort of regulation the normal tempo on this auction should be expected to be much slower than on a similar auction at the one-level.

2. Without additional information regarding this partnerships history and experience a slow pass from south does not demonstrably suggest bidding on. Partner will often have either some heart support or some values.

3. In many ways a quick Pass here conveys more information than a slow Pass.

[swanway]

There is a mistake with the bidding sequence. East did not bid 5S. It was West who bid 5S that was doubled by South. What difference does this make to your ruling?

[bluejak]

That may be a misjudgement, but I no longer believe any call was wild or gambling, so we can ignore Law 12C1B and provide the same ruling for both sides.

[mycroft]

So, what did North think was going to happen - they weren't going to take 4H as "transfer into my void"? And if he was always going to bid 5H over 4S (but not 5C? 752 is such great trumps?), why didn't he bid 5H to begin with?

Unless either North or E/W are real novices (North because he didn't know better, E/W because North thought that he might get to play 4H) after an acknowledged excessive hesitation (I did check to make sure that 4S was made after an appropriate pause, right?) 5H is a "if your hand is good enough for 5H now, it was good enough the last round" call and it's going to be disallowed.

I can't see any LA except pass, given that North was willing to overcall only 4H on the last round, unless they have agreements I don't know about. Double seems - odd, with a zero-likely-but-maximum-one-trick hand and a passing partner.

I agree with everyone that 5S by East is a Serious Error, Wild or Gambling but that 5S by West is reasonable at the colours.