Another Hesitation issue

[Ed Roggeveen]

Hope there are still people out there - forum a bit quiet lately, maybe everybody has got to grips with the rules at last
At a small club recently that has no qualified director (three senior players "take turns") the following happened (no one vul):
S (experienced player) pass
W (very new player) pass
N (senior player and Grandmaster) 1S
E (senior player, directing) X
then S bids 3S and doesn't use a stop card. W thinks for a VERY long time and passes. N passes. E bids 4D. S passes. W bids 4H. Passed out and makes 4H.
A few points to note - N has 7HCPs and no distributional values for his bid.
EW are not playing weak 2s or have any sort of bid to show a weak 6 card major.
E has:
S: A
H: Qx
D: AQJxx
C: KTxxx

W had 7 HCPs with 6 hearts and 2 diamonds.

N immediately objected and called the third senior player over. He argued that the auction should go back to 3S. He believes the 4D is not justified and would not have been bid if bidding was in tempo. I was not there (but know all the players involved) but was asked later. Another qualified director has also been asked. Here are the two different rulings so far:
1) two say the 4H making stands. Reason: stop card was not used and also as W is new she has a bit more latitude for thinking time;
2) one says the contract is 4D making however many it makes. Reason: the 4D bid is justified based on the hand and may have been bid if W had passed in tempo. However, the 4H shouldn't stand because if the hand is not good enough to open, and not good enough to bid over 3S after partner's double, then it is not good enough to bid over 4D. However, would also be happy if appeal committee went back to 3S but adamant that 4H cannot stand.
Any votes for either of these or the GM's opinion? Or something else perhaps?

[Ed Reppert]

The contract was 4H making 4. The question is whether we adjust the score, and if so to what.

Why is a Grand Master psyching against a very new player? What is the systemic meaning of 3S after the (I presume T/O) double?

Edit: I may not be fully awake (I hate insomnia) but it appears to me that argument #2 is utter nonsense. West has no UI that I can see, so can do whatever she likes.

[Ed Roggeveen]

To answer number 1 - it's not really a psyche as he did have 5 spades. 3S is 10-12 with spade support. Also, that's just the sort of player he is and I suspect partially why the director on the night ruled against him!

In a roundabout way I suppose W does have UI in that E bid after the long pause so must have a stronger hand - otherwise they would pass at the 4 level. But then you would have to disallow that bid also ...

[Ed Reppert]

Originally Posted by Ed Roggeveen

To answer number 1 - it's not really a psyche as he did have 5 spades.

A psych is a "deliberate and gross misstatement of honor strength and/or of suit length" so what makes it a psych is the seven HCP, notwithstanding the 5 card suit. Unless he routinely opens on so few points.

3S is 10-12 with spade support. Also, that's just the sort of player he is and I suspect partially why the director on the night ruled against him!

Heh. Directors really shouldn't let personalities influence their rulings.

In a roundabout way I suppose W does have UI in that E bid after the long pause so must have a stronger hand - otherwise they would pass at the 4 level. But then you would have to disallow that bid also ...

The auction is AI. So are the requirements of the law.

[Nick Whitten]

I would first tell South off for not using the stopcard.
And then tell NS there is no way I will consider adjusting THEIR score (regardless of whether or not I believed EW had infringed in any way) because THEY caused the problem.

And then pause long enough for NS to either:
Do the decent thing and withdraw their objection
Or
Ask me to consider adjusting EW score only. (showing their true colours to the new player )

I would also like to tell North off for psyching against beginners but that is not illegal, although it is very bad manners and also bad bridge!

[Ed Reppert]

Psyching against beginners may violate Law 74A2. Or there might be a regulation against "frivolous" psyching and psyching against beginners may be consider frivolous.

How did NS cause the problem?

[Nick Whitten]

Basically by not using the stopcard.
If S had used the stopcard correctly and there was additional hesitation by West then the "normal" adjustment (whatever that might be - it is difficult) would apply.
If stopcards are available but not compulsory in that event I would still expect them to be used in a situation like this (and not favourably adjust their result if they didn't).

[Ed Reppert]

Hm. The NZ reg is

When a player omits to use the Stop Card before making a skip bid, or to pause for the mandatory 10 seconds when required, the failure to do so may be taken into account by the Director, and subsequently by an Appeals Committee, when assessing what action to take under Law 16B (extraneous information from partner).

From the original post:

W thinks for a VERY long time...

It seems fairly clear that West's hesitation was "undue" even considering South's failure to use the stop card. I would think that the intent of the regulation is to take into account that a hesitation may not be "undue" if there was no stop card, but in this case, I don't think it so. So I do not think it legal to award a split score here. What you can do, and probably should given South's level of experience, is give a PP (a warning is sufficient for a first offense) for the failure to use the stop card.

[Ed Reppert]

Going back to the two options presented for rulings:

1. This is basically a judgment that West's hesitation was not "undue" so did not convey UI. Or that it did convey UI, but we don't care 'cause West is a noob. I don't think the former would be my judgment, but if I were NS I wouldn't argue against it, or appeal. The latter is not the right way to go, IMO.

2. That a call "may have been made" if there had been no infraction is not relevant. However, if there is no LA to 4D, or if there is no UI, or if the UI doesn't suggest bidding, then 4D is perfectly legal. And if it is perfectly legal, so is 4H. So either you rule "result stands" or you adjust to 3S making however many you judge it will make.

[Nick Whitten]

Ok so if I can’t split the score then I wanna clobber NS with a savage PP. People who don’t use the stopcard properly make me wild!
And there are so many of them here there are some who think the stopcards should be done away with, as is the case in some states in Ozzie.
And I wouldn’t want that!
Heres what happened to someone I know earlier this year in the Gold Coast Congress (where there was not a stopcard to be seen in the whole Congress).
LHO makes a weak jump bid, partner pauses for no more than 10” before passing.
Our hero, normally a very aggressive player, would normally compete now but felt he couldn’t (because he had passed earlier that ipso facto makes pass a LA now).
He got a bad result whereas someone less ethical might have bid and got away with it.