[Shugart23]

So today my partner paused in the bidding to think and then after a bit passed. Clearly was thinking something . My RHO passes and I didn’t really have a bid and even so felt the pause was too long and would have passed anyway. But afterward, this got me thinking. I assume if I have an obvious legitimate bid, I can make it regardless of the pause . Is that true? If RHO makes a bid, instead of a pass, can I bid ? If no, and bid comes around to me a second time, must I maintain my vow of silence? Would someone take a minute and explain?

[Cyberyeti]

Basically if you have an obvious bid/call with no alternative - you can make it.

If you have alternatives, you have to bend over backwards to choose the one that is NOT suggested by the hesitation.

[pescetom]

Shugart23, on 2024-December-22, 15:43, said:

So today my partner paused in the bidding to think and then after a bit passed. Clearly was thinking something . My RHO passes and I didn’t really have a bid and even so felt the pause was too long and would have passed anyway.

If you read what you wrote carefully, I think you already had a good idea of the answer. "I didn’t really have a bid and even so felt the pause was too long"... you recognise that only the unauthorized information of the pause might suggest you bid, the consequence should be clear. Had you had an obvious bid, it would remain legitimate only if you have no alternative.

[paulg]

I run my club's annual congress where the field ranges from international players to local club players at their only congress of the year.

I send out a one-pager to all the participants. It tells the good players not to make any rulings at the table, but to call the director. Among the four bits of advice for the less experienced is;

• Try and bid in tempo
  This can be very difficult for all players but it is not an infraction to take your time. However your partner must take care not to appear to take advantage.
  
  If your partner hesitates in the auction, you can make any call you want, but you should make sure that your call is consistent with what your peers would make: if asked, I will be checking if it has been ‘suggested’ by the hesitation.
  
  In general, it is worse to hesitate and pass as it suggests that you were considering something else. If you hesitate and bid, then at least you show some values.

Paul

[mycroft]

"When a player has available unauthorized information from partner,... the player must carefully avoid taking advantage from that unauthorized information."

Law 73C, minus examples (of which, yes, "haste or hesitation" is one).

What is the unauthorized information from a hesitation? That partner thought about doing something else.

What is the "something else" when partner passes? That partner wanted to take some action, but felt uncomfortable doing so.

What action? Well, it always depends on the auction et al, but almost all boil down to "I've got more than my pass shows". So bidding on is safer than with an in-tempo pass. Doubling is safer than with an in-tempo pass. This is especially so if it's a "do something intelligent" double, because now you're saying "whatever it was you were wanting to do, go ahead."

Does it mean "if it hesitates, shoot it"? No. If your action is automatic, take it. To be flagrantly extreme about it, if it takes partner 20 seconds to open 1♣ Precision, passing is simply Not An Option. Sure, it gets less obvious very quickly, but I gave a ruling in Puerto Vallarta that, stripped of all the caveats and legal, was "they're in a game force, passing the opponents undoubled below game Can't Happen, doesn't matter how long partner thought about it."

Those kinds of forcing pass auctions are interesting from a UI perspective, because sure, they say "I don't know whether to bid on or double" - but that's what the forcing pass says. The pause *likely* means more "I want to do this, but I'm not sure it's right" - but you can't tell whether "this" is double or bid, so...

But definitely in balancing situations, partner's "interest" in the auction, whether it be a hesitation, or an unreasonable question (of the "No I didn't forget to Alert" or "you never ask the range when they forget to Announce over 1NT, but you did this time" type) means it's *very likely* you are stuck.

As a side note, why is it written "must carefully avoid" rather than "must ignore" or any of the other rephrasings loved by the A crowd? Because players are pattern-matching machines, and they will find it "obvious" to do what the UI suggested, while consciously ignoring the UI. Even when it's rebidding a 5-card suit they have already shown at the 3 level when partner has chosen another option - and telling the director "it was obvious. no, of course, partner telling the table (and me) that I don't have that suit didn't influence me at all." They really believe it, at least at the time.

My advice, as always, is "do your best; if the director gets called, explain your reasoning; if you are ruled against, accept it as 'a judgement error' exactly the same as, on the next hand, 'I held up and it was wrong'." Everybody uses UI sometimes, whether they do what they're supposed to or "work out if it's a 75% or 65% action" or whatever. So will you. If you did your best, you remain an ethical bridge player whose judgement, on this hand, was wrong.

[johnu]

paulg, on 2024-December-23, 04:18, said:

I send out a one-pager to all the participants. It tells the good players not to make any rulings at the table, but to call the director.

The instructions should just tell all players not to make rulings at the table, but knowing bridge players, nearly everybody considers themselves a good player.