[Cascade]

If the pair are playing standard SAYC then double is for penalties and there is no adjustment.

If the pair are in fact playing negative doubles then I do not think that a slow negative double suggests to West to leave the double in. A slow pass might suggest to West to double.

Therefore I let the score stand.

In addition I would warn EW for their lack of complete cooperation in sorting this out. I have little tolerance for players that will not answer the TD. If this was a repeat offense then I would penalize them if possible.

[McBruce]

Just a note which might prove applicable to those playing in ACBL tourneys:

In Law 16A1, which deals with reserving one's rights to call the Director later, the Laws allow sponsoiring organizations some take-it-or-leave-it lattitude. The ACBL's choice is to not allow the practice of reserving one's rights, and they say that the Director should be called immediately when an opponent makes potentially damaging UI available to his partner.

Not sure why the ACBL has decided as such. It used to be a good way to deal with long pauses--if RHO paused before bidding, you would say "tempo break, all agree?" and in the usual case where all did agree you could just get on with the hand and worry about damage later. Now the TD comes a running every time, and bridge lawyers can make the game take forever.

As for those who want damage, let's assume that the pair was playing 3♠ as a negative double and it was an ironclad agreement. Where is the damage? Surely nobody is saying that passing a negative double is illegal. It is this alleged hesitation that the TD was never told about until well into the next hand that seems to be leading people to Law 16. I think that whatever version of L16A1 is on in your area, halfway through the next hand has to be too late to report a hitch.

[Cascade]

McBruce, on Jul 21 2004, 12:09 PM, said:

It used to be a good way to deal with long pauses--if RHO paused before bidding, you would say "tempo break, all agree?" and in the usual case where all did agree you could just get on with the hand and worry about damage later.

I wish.

The usual response I get is complete denial. Against some players I have taken to timing the tempo break and they still deny the break. I guess this is just another way of cheating.

However I do agree that the process works quite well when all four players agree. I know of one player in particular who is quick to point out that there is a tempo break. While he has done this several times at my table we have never had a subsequent problem after acknowledging the tempo break.

[1eyedjack]

hotShot, on Jul 20 2004, 03:42 PM, said:

Well I don't think the penalty double is so clear.

I probably double for penalties less than anyone else, but this one stands out to me.

hotShot, on Jul 20 2004, 03:42 PM, said:

East has 7 cards that are no trump,

I need a majority of trumps in my own hand to double? Declarer also has 6 cards that are not trumps, and three of his 7 trumps should be losers, even if you use one of yours to ruff AND you get endplayed to lead trumps (the 8) once.

hotShot, on Jul 20 2004, 03:42 PM, said:

you can't count on the Q's to make a trick,

True, but you CAN count on them promoting partner's Kings and Jacks, of which he should have several for his opening bid.

Declarer bid 3S expecting not to make, and you have nothing but bad news for him. You have at least 2 more trumps than he can reasonably expect when bidding it. Opponents cannot have more than 7 trumps between them. Partner has opened the bidding. You almost have an opening bid of your own, and your side certainly has the majority of high card honours. Trumps are breaking badly in the best possible way for the defence. Your target is only 5 tricks to their 9.

If you do not double this one, my friend, you can put the red card back in the packing case for good.

[keylime]

Folks everyone's missed the boat here because no one's mentioned that the penalty double there of East is an IMMEDIATE alert because of them not being a passed hand. I award 60/40 with E/W getting the short stick AND I slap a 1/4 board procedural penalty for making a double that was clearly penalty and not alerted. And with regards to West, a stern sitdown about obligations and conduct (unless it was clear that they fully understood the double to be penalty and felt that they were in the right - then that brings another set of issues. From what I've read, West's thinking time doesn't bar them from taking a possible LA of pass there).

[hrothgar]

keylime, on Jul 23 2004, 12:05 AM, said:

Folks everyone's missed the boat here because no one's mentioned that the penalty double there of East is an IMMEDIATE alert because of them not being a passed hand.

I've never seen this regulation before.
Could you show me where it was in the conditions of contest?

In all seriousness, most tournaments base their alert structure off SAYC, and in SAYC this is clearly defined as a penalty double.

[keylime]

It's in the alert procedure for the ACBL, and some flavors of SAYC play neg X's up through 3S, not 2S. Hence the problem - saying "SAYC" isn't exactly "SAYC" to some people. Most NBO's have their quirks as we know went it comes to alertable/nonalertable doubles.

What IS the range of negative doubles for the contest?

[1eyedjack]

keylime, on Jul 22 2004, 04:05 PM, said:

Folks everyone's missed the boat here because no one's mentioned that the penalty double there of East is an IMMEDIATE alert because of them not being a passed hand. I award 60/40 with E/W getting the short stick AND I slap a 1/4 board procedural penalty for making a double that was clearly penalty and not alerted.

I missed the part where we were told that ACBL alerting regulations had jurisdiction.

At worst the failure to alert, if it was alertable, was misinformation to N/S. However there was clearly no damage as N/S were never going to take any action other than pass it out in 3SX, nor was there any more profitable action that N/S could have made had they the inclination.

[annebabe]

There are the "laws"and everyone should respect them.

My reason for calling the TD was the doubler's rudeness. Yes, he hesitated and yes we were getting a zero (deserved.) And we have all had a double that the Bank of England would back, but partner pulls it, because.... (many reasons)

My point is that a "fast" double makes it clear that "I have my double" and a very very very slow double has the same affect. BTW, no ccard was posted and no mention of sayc was made (if that is relevant)
The TD asked the doubler to say "yes" or "no" if he paused unusually long several times. Not only did the doubler say rude things but refused to answer "yes" or "no" ...

The TD could give us the -800 (we were entitled to) but they did not play "partnership" .. it was dictatorship. If he was the "boss" in the partnership (as is sometimes the case) the long hesitation made it "clear" So some negative adjustment to these opponents was not unreasonable.

I think the issue is not "the rule" that in sayc a double of 2 spades or higher is penalty, but with the hesitation, this partner could NOT over ride her partner's decision or the rule. This partner KNEW.. without a doubt that her partner 'had us' as indeed he did.

Heck, even my mom would have known. She's the dealer on BBO. And if she doesn't like the way you've acted, she gives the Aces and Kings to your opponents.

[annebabe]

Apply rules where appropriate. Is there a rule for a "fast" pass? Is there a rule for a "very very very" slow pass?

[keylime]

Lovely game this bridge is.

[dogsbreath]

hi ..anyone care to define what a 'slow' pass is on BBO?
How many times have you finished a round with 5 or more mins to spare.. then when y are ready to play another 2/3 mins appears ..so you go for a coffee ..
when y get back there have been 1 or more bids and its your turn.. is a pass now a 'slow' pass?
Rgds Dog

Quote

furnulum pani nolo