Banner

Search MSO Worldwide

 

MSO Events Mind Sports Zine Brain Power Play Games Online Community Links

Home
Site Map
What's New
Help
Mind Sports Zine
MSO Events
Brain Power
Play Games Online
Community
Links






Copyright © 1999-2000 by Mind Sports Organisation Worldwide Ltd.

E-mail:
info@msoworld.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appeal No 8

Tempo

Appeals Committee: Doug Heron (chair)
  Bart Bramley
  Barbara Nudelman
  Marlene Passell
  Riggs Thayer

Open BAM Teams, 20 November,
First Final Session

Board 15
Dealer South
Vul: N/S

  Yi Zhong  
6
7 6 3
A 8 4 3 2
10 9 8 4
Versace
N
W
E
S
Lauria
10 5 3
A J 8 7 4
A 10 2
K Q J 4
Q J 6
7
K Q 6 3
A 5 2
Fan
K Q 9 2
9 8 5
K 10 9 5
J 7

West
North
East
South
...
...
...
Pass
1
Pass
1
Pass
1NT
Pass(1)
2(2)
Pass
2
Pass
3(3)
Pass
3 Pass 4 Dbl
All Pass
...
...
...
(1) Break in tempo.
(2) Alerted; checkback.
(3) Forcing.

The Facts: 4 doubled went down one, +100 for N/S. The opening lead was the J. The Director was called after the double of 4 and was told that North had hesitated 5-6 seconds before passing 1NT. N/S denied any hesitation.

The Director ruled that there had been no unmistakable hesitation and allowed the table result to stand.

The Appeal: E/W appealed the Director's ruling. The E/W team captain (George Jacobs) attended the hearing. E/W claimed that a hesitation of approximately 5-6 seconds occurred after the 1NT call and that South's double might have been suggested by the hesitation. North said there was no reason for him to hesitate holding only four points vulnerable, with his partner not showing any values. He thought he had taken 2-3 seconds to bid over 1NT.

N/S explained that at a previous regional, the Director had been called to the table because they had bid too quickly.The Director had suggested they hesitate briefly before each bid. N/S pointed out that this was a BAM event, and risking the double at BAM was a good gamble with South's holding even if partner could not contribute to the defense, especially since, although East had shown extra values, West had rejected two game tries by East.

The Committee's decision: The question of the hesitation was discussed fully, and the Committee found no reason to find that there had been a hesitation by North. Therefore no infraction had occurred and there was no restriction on any action that South chose.

The Committee also decided that this appeal was without substantial merit, and should not have come to Committee. East, West and the team captain were issued an appeal without merit warning.

Appeal 8