[jillybean]

please explain

[ASC87]

"In deciding which card to play, the declarer seeks to confuse opponents, obscure their signals to each other, and create a false impression about one's holding. To fool a partner without confusing the declarer is sabotage --- not deception. A long pause is the antithesis of deception. It gives the show away."


I apologize for the incomplete post. I tried editing it, but I couldn't navigate it properly. My question is about a statement that I came across. The statement says, 'A long pause may give the show away,' and it resonated with me. I am curious to know more about this statement from others.
Thank you
ASC

[smerriman]

It's not your fault; the forum is broken.

The concept seems straightforward enough. There are numerous situations where pausing reveals what you have - e.g. if declarer takes a finesse, it may be right to duck in 4th seat hoping they'll repeat it. Hesitating then ducking is pointless, since declarer then knows what you have, since it's illegal to pause deceptively.

Meanwhile partner has to bend over backwards to assume you might not have what the pause implied..

[ASC87]

I am extremely appreciative of your reply. I was not aware of the fact that it could be illegal. As a beginner in this field, I don't have much knowledge about these kinds of things. However, it is essential to know about the potential risks involved, whether intentional or unintentional.

smerriman, on 2024-January-26, 13:16, said:

It's not your fault; the forum is broken.

The concept seems straightforward enough. There are numerous situations where pausing reveals what you have - e.g. if declarer takes a finesse, it may be right to duck in 4th seat hoping they'll repeat it. Hesitating then ducking is pointless, since declarer then knows what you have, since it's illegal to pause deceptively.

Meanwhile partner has to bend over backwards to assume you might not have what the pause implied..

[pescetom]

Semantics are important - was the unknown author of this quote really talking about a long pause, or just a pause?
A pause is already a variation in tempo.

[mikeh]

Whoever penned the quote was, I believe, assuming that the ‘long pause’ was legitimate, in that pauser believed he or she had a real bridge problem. Dummy has KJxxx in a side suit in a trump contract. Opener wins the opening lead (in another suit) and puts a small card on the table. Should defender fly with the Ace or play low, hoping declarer will play the Jack, losing to partner’s hypothetical Queen?

Any significant hesitation by the defender is ‘the antithesis of deception’ because it telegraphs the Ace…there is no legitimate bridge reason for thinking at this point unless one is pondering whether to play the Ace. Hence the saying.

Note that hesitating without the ace would likely (and imo usually correctly) be seen as an illegal effort to deceive. Now, I’ve seen some beginners hesitate here because they’re trying to work out whether they should be giving count! Count may be obviously irrelevant to anyone beyond the beginner stage, but such players deserve some accommodation….if I were pretty sure that’s what was going on, as a Director, I’d explain why the hesitation is bad, and adjust the board accordingly (assuming declarer went wrong) but I’d try to make it a teaching experience rather than a disciplinary one.

My most embarrassing experience at the table (and I’ve had many, usually based on a bad bid or play) was against a friend….I held Qxx in a suit, in which dummy held AKJ9x. My friend, known on the auction to hold two or three cards in the suit, led the 10. I was genuinely distracted: he’d played quickly (but in no way ‘too quickly’ and I was considering the inferences from dummy, the auction and trick one…so I hesitated simply because I had to change mental horses in mid-stream.

Unfortunately I compounded matters by reflexively saying ‘sorry, I don’t have a problem’…..which was true in a sense in that covering was a zero play…it could never win but could lose if declarer took the anti-percentage play of trying to drop Qx offside.

Further unfortunately, declarer quite properly took my remark as saying I didn’t hold the queen, so he did try to drop it offside.

I felt awful…called the TD on myself….got an entirely appropriate lecture on my ethical responsibilities but the result stood. I was lucky it was against a friend….someone who didn’t know me could easily and justifiably think I’d done this deliberately. Why tell this story? To illustrate how it’s possible to cause problems through inappropriate hesitations (in my case compounded by a wrongly offered reflexive statement).

[pescetom]

ASC87, on 2024-January-26, 13:27, said:

I am extremely appreciative of your reply. I was not aware of the fact that it could be illegal. As a beginner in this field, I don't have much knowledge about these kinds of things. However, it is essential to know about the potential risks involved, whether intentional or unintentional.

I suggest you read the Laws, it takes a day or so but is well worthwhile.
For example, a player must carefully avoid taking advantage of partner's unmistakable hesitation or unwonted speed.
A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a
singleton).

[ASC87]

It was about the strategy of choosing which card to play, confusing the opponents, and creating a false impression about one's own cards.

I do see the significance of pausing before playing a card, but If I understood correctly, any variation in tempo, even if stop cards are in play, can reveal valuable information to the opponents. Hence, I need to be cognizant of my tempo and avoid unintentionally revealing any play plan to the opponents, but equally important to not intentionally create any impressions. Is that correct?

pescetom, on 2024-January-26, 13:28, said:

Semantics are important - was the unknown author of this quote really talking about a long pause, or just a pause?
A pause is already a variation in tempo, assuming that Stop cards are still in place.

[ASC87]

Noted. On it. Thanks a bunch.

pescetom, on 2024-January-26, 13:36, said:

I suggest you read the Laws, it takes a day or so but is well worthwhile.
For example, a player must carefully avoid taking advantage of partner's unmistakable hesitation or unwonted speed.
A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a
singleton).

[smerriman]

I wouldn't say *essential* - there are many times when you do need to have a good think, and thinking through your options carefully will lead you to the best choice. Especially as a beginner, where it's more important to think than just play quickly in fear of the implications of hesitating.

But there are definitely some commonly occurring situations that you'll learn over time to see coming in advance, where playing in tempo will help you get better results.

As long as you're not pretending to think for the sake of deception, you have nothing to worry about when hesitating yourself. But you do need to be careful not to read into partner's hesitations, as that's akin to interpreting them winking at you across the table.

[ASC87]

Eyeopening comments and discussion, I must say.
My bedtime read: http://www.worldbrid...ohighlights.pdf

smerriman, on 2024-January-26, 13:57, said:

I wouldn't say *essential* - there are many times when you do need to have a good think, and thinking through your options carefully will lead you to the best choice. Especially as a beginner, where it's more important to think than just play quickly in fear of the implications of hesitating.

But there are definitely some commonly occurring situations that you'll learn over time to see coming in advance, where playing in tempo will help you get better results.

As long as you're not pretending to think for the sake of deception, you have nothing to worry about when hesitating yourself. But you do need to be careful not to read into partner's hesitations, as that's akin to interpreting them winking at you across the table.

[ASC87]

My goodness. Thank you for sharing this. I understand what you explained, but I still have a question. In the example you gave, how is it considered deception? This kind of situation is fairly common, and I must admit that in express tournaments, I have been replaced by a bot simply because I was confused or took too long to decide. How can anyone tell if I'm truly confused or if I'm intentionally stalling? This could cause me anxiety in future games, and I might end up rushing my decisions, which my partner absolutely hates.

[smerriman]

ASC87, on 2024-January-26, 14:32, said:

This kind of situation is fairly common, and I must admit that in express tournaments, I have been replaced by a bot simply because I was confused or took too long to decide. How can anyone tell if I'm truly confused or if I'm intentionally stalling? This could cause me anxiety in future games, and I might end up rushing my decisions, which my partner absolutely hates.

Many forms of casual online bridge don't conform to the laws at all. It is the responsibility of a qualified director to decide whether any laws have been infringed, including whether there were legitimate reasons for a pause - including poor internet connections for online play, where they can have access to records of timing of previous plays, or whether a situation would require thought based on the skill level of the players in question, even if it wouldn't for others. Express tournaments have no director, and nobody really follows any rules.

[ASC87]

Makes sense.
Thank you

[0 carbon]

I don't know why BBO does not display P's and RHO bids at the same time, like in high level tournaments.

[pescetom]

0 carbon, on 2024-January-26, 23:16, said:

I don't know why BBO does not display P's and RHO bids at the same time, like in high level tournaments.

The same reason that clubs don't use screens, I imagine...
fear that paying customers will not appreciate a cleaner game.

[mycroft]

One note: the express tournaments, that is an explicit condition of contest - make your calls and plays in "x seconds" or get replaced by a bot. You know it in advance - at least you do if you read the CoC, BBO assumes you know from experience or hearing about it.

As far as "going against the Laws" - I don't see any Law that regulation conflicts with. Therefore, by Law, that regulation is legal if approved by the chain of RAs (and the ACBL specifically devolves their RA power, almost 100%, to the clubs, one of which the Express games are run by).

In fact, arguably it is explicitly allowed by 80B2e "conditions of bidding and play", rather than 80B2f "supplementary to, but not conflicting with". 91A allows the "Director" to suspend a player from the current session for violating the regulation. The fact that enforcement is automatic doesn't seem to affect the rights.

If it makes you anxious to have to play at that speed, then the Express games are not for you. They're not for everyone; I know I've never played one (and I am probably a too fast player). Play one that goes at the pace you are comfortable playing. There are lots of them.

[smerriman]

mycroft, on 2024-January-28, 10:24, said:

As far as "going against the Laws" - I don't see any Law that regulation conflicts with.

The comments above were about deceptive hesitations and making use of UI being against the laws. Neither can be applied in express tournaments, nor is any form of disclosure (all players are told to use GIB's CC, but nobody does; generally you don't have a clue what any bids mean and can't ask).

It's definitely not a form of the game I'd recommend.