[Vampyr]

bluejak, on 2011-June-14, 08:20, said:

In the EBU it is an infraction not to pause for a reasonable time, for example ten seconds, whether the Stop card is out properly or not.

Nevertheless, some sympathy and benefit of the doubt should be given to a player who does not hesitate the full ten seconds when the Stop card is immediately removed.

It is very hard on a player who does have something to think about, as he has to keep track of the seconds while trying to think at the same time. I think that a better regulation would stipulate that a player may take up to ten seconds without being deemed to hesitate but may also bid as soon as the stop card is removed, without being deemed to bid with undue haste.

A regulation that stipulate that the STOP card is optional seems strange, and also a minefield -- how are players supposed to know, when their opponent uses/fails to use the STOP card, whether he always follows the same practice?

[RMB1]

VixTD, on 2011-June-14, 10:55, said:

I still think that if the alleged hesitator was in the habit of taking time after a jump bid, and had on this occasion taken just that amount of time, they would not have readily admitted to having broken normal tempo. I certainly wouldn't have done.

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

If the alleged hesitator had been reminded of the stop procedure either at the time (by the 4♥ bidder using the stop card) or afterwards (by the TD asking if the stop card was used). He might have admitted to pausing for 10 seconds. As it is we don't know, and the alleged hesitator is due the benefit of the doubt, whatever he admitted at the time.

[lamford]

RMB1, on 2011-June-14, 11:10, said:

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

Indeed, I think the right procedure was to find out approximately long he did take. If he often bid as soon as the stop card was removed after a few seconds, that would be the infraction, not this occasion - unless, of course, he did take more than 10 seconds. It is not good enough to say, "everybody fiddles their expenses, we can't do anything about it" when people hold the stop card there for a millisecond. If the rule is worth having, it should be enforced, and UI can equally be given by the instant pass, on this hand no doubt showing a "vanilla 16-count" with no interest in getting involved.

[VixTD]

RMB1, on 2011-June-14, 11:10, said:

Of course he admitted he broke tempo, he would have broken tempo if he had paused for 10 second because no one (including the TD) seemed to think there was a stop procedure.

If the alleged hesitator had been reminded of the stop procedure either at the time (by the 4♥ bidder using the stop card) or afterwards (by the TD asking if the stop card was used). He might have admitted to pausing for 10 seconds. As it is we don't know, and the alleged hesitator is due the benefit of the doubt, whatever he admitted at the time.

No, the TD assumed that the stop procedure had been followed, because no one said anything to suggest that it hadn't. And if players need to be reminded to follow the stop procedure, there's a fair assumption that they don't normally follow it, so any pause would constitute a hesitation anyway.

[RMB1]

VixTD, on 2011-June-15, 06:47, said:

No, the TD assumed that the stop procedure had been followed, because no one said anything to suggest that it hadn't.

That seems an unwarrented assumption given that:

VixTD, on 2011-June-14, 06:39, said:

95% of the players I come across don't observe the "stop" procedure.

[VixTD]

RMB1, on 2011-June-15, 10:52, said:

That seems an unwarrented assumption given that:

But if they hadn't, it wouldn't matter, the ruling would be the same. Why do you go looking for trouble unnecessarily?

Most players I meet at the bridge table, as player or director, flash the stop card briefly, but don't do any pausing. Those who do pause do so regardless of how long the stop card is left out (up to 10 seconds or so). You seem to be trying to cater for a non-existant category of player - those who want to pause, but feel obliged to call immediately the stop card is removed. There may be such players in the world, but I've never met any.

[lamford]

VixTD, on 2011-June-15, 11:20, said:

But if they hadn't, it wouldn't matter, the ruling would be the same.

What was the ruling, out of interest?

[shevek]

Result stands.

The big concern for South is that North has six good spades and is about remove 4♥X to 4♠.
So North's hesitation makes it less attractive for South to double.

That would concern me as South enough that I might have passed out 4♥. Note that double in our strong club style would be takeout, trusting their super fit. We would double as North.

[ggwhiz]

I would take issue with North only if there was no significant pause for thought.

The NABC casebooks have an occasional example of highly unusual auctions where the committee rule that a (slightly) longer than usual pause for thought was called for and carried no UI.

A passes hand bouncing to a vul game opposite less than an opening bid is a lot for North to digest.