[euclidz]

B.1. After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play as for example by an unmistakable hesitation (during bidding) . . the partner may not choose from amongst logical alternatives one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another . .

A regular scenario during a competing auction is a player pausing to consider whether to pass, bid on or double opponents bid. I presume that is the next bid in his partners hand is clearly sensible a Director would rule that there was no logical alternative BUT where his partners next bid is a pass, bid or double how do we quantify that his partners choice of bid was assisted by that hesitation - is it simply a matter of judgement and if it is, is that adjudications based on the balance of probabilities or something else? And, if it is no way that his partner could know which option(s) were being considered during the hesitation would it correctly ruled that his next bid was not influenced by the hesitation? In short (and in writing this I think I am forming a conclusion) is it the case that the reason for hesitation must be obvious for deeming that his partner had received extraneous information?

[barmar]

It's a judgement call. But the law says "could demonstrably have been suggested", so the TD has to be able to demonstrate why the hesitation specifically suggests one thing over another. If the hesitator could easily have been considering a variety of actions, it doesn't really suggest anything in particular to his partner, so he's not constrained.

Some jurisdictions have guidelines in their regulation -- I think one of EBU's colored books has something to say about what you can assume that hesitations suggest in certain situations.

And if partner's action is clear, there may be no other LAs. If there's only one LA, he isn't choosing from among LAs, so this clause doesn't apply. For instance, you open a major with an unbalanced (but not freakish) 15 count, and partner hesitates before making an invitational raise. Accepting the invitation is the only LA, so the hesitation is irrelevant.

[pran]

If the hesitator passes then it is pretty obvious that he has some values (in excess of what he has already shown in the auction) making him consider whether to bid or (re-)double rather than pass.
In that case his partner must be extremely careful not to choose any action that could be suggested by the knowledge that hesitator has such values.

On the contrary if the hesitator makes a call other than pass then it is much more difficult to deduce what was the hesitator's options, and consequently less possible to guess what alternative action(s) the hesitator considered.

Therefore a "good" advice is that if you hesitate then do not pass!

[axman]

pran, on 2016-February-11, 14:45, said:

Therefore a "good" advice is that if you hesitate then do not pass!

Before doing so, some would be careful to consider the possibility that the capacity of the cards has not yet been exceeded, nor would likely be exceeded.

[euclidz]

Thanks all