[ArtK78]

In an ACBL Speedball Game on BBO the other night, we had another example of an opponent taking advantage of his partner's hesitation. I have spoken with probably all of the ACBL TDs on BBO about hesitations and taking advantage of hesitations, and they all tell me that they have a blanket policy of ignoring hesitations, as there are so many reasons why a player does not or cannot act in tempo in an online environment. However, there must be some limitations.

Here is the one from the other night. Tell me, am I wrong, or is this not the most over-the-top example of taking advantage of a hesitation?

The auction, at matchpoints, with no one vulnerable:

(P) - 1NT* - (P)** - P
(2♣)*** - 2♦ - (x) - P
(2♥) - P - (3NT) - All Pass

* 10-12 (we prealerted our 10-12 1NT opening nonvul)
** - Noticeable hesitation
*** - No alert (this may be relevant later)

When LHO bid 2♣, I commented on the chat line "it is not nice to bid on your partner's hesitation." I know that we never get redress for this kind of behavior, so I wanted to let my LHO know that I disapproved of his action sight unseen. Interestingly enough, neither opponent said anything. Normally, in this situation, one of them protests that there was no hesitation.

This is the dummy that came down:

Txx
KJ9xx
x
xxxx

Declarer, who hesitated over 1NT, only held:

Axx
AT
KQJ9x
AKT

Regardless of the result, I thought that this was the most incredible example of a hesitation conveying UI and taking advantage of the UI that I have ever seen.

Even the TD was surprised by this one. After reciting the ACBL online policy about hesitations, he looked at the hand and said "I see what you mean." But there was still no score adjustment.

As far as the play was concerned, declarer guessed the heart Q doubleton in the 1NT opener's hand, so there was no defense. The fact is that I lead a diamond, so it was hard to beat the hand in any event.

Is there no limitation to the policy about online hesitations?

[gwnn]

Dunno, what if next time his partner will have run out for a beer and he acted on those hcp only to find out -1100 is not a good mp score? The situation does not seem very clear to me.

[HeavyDluxe]

This does make me wonder why BBO doesn't 'stall' partner and RHO's bids in the display - simulating the concept of screens.

This isn't a criticism, just an idea. What prompted me thinking about was the VuGraph for one of the pre-NABC junior sessions. Jlall was the operator, and he was entering bids two at a time to not give away any information.

It should be a simple thing to do something similar in 'high level' tourneys on BBO. If someone is *really* stalling, their 'screenmate' could call the director. But that would make it so I wouldn't know who was in the tank/lagging - partner or opps.

This idea is probably chock full of holes... But, just thinkin'.

[DJNeill]

Hi,
This is an old issue but it is clear that as the software does not log hesitations or at least make it available through the software, there is no way for the directors to efficiently (as they might in real life) question all parties etc etc. Just like if you have reports of abuse you are requested to provide a screenshot, there is no recording to submit here. Surely it is possible to log recording as another program does, but prosecuting the cases is a big job considering the number of directors currently working and the "speedball" lightning pace (do some players ever eat?)and tweaks to the current business model would have to be implemented to handle the problems that may arise.

Thanks,
Dan

[jillybean]

(edited)
It seems that people believe breaks in tempo that create unauthorized information don’t exist or are too hard to deal with in online games – I disagree.

[bigmax]

Quote

I commented on the chat line "it is not nice to bid on your partner's hesitation."

Not commenting on EW ethics (based on provided info I believe that E had no idea what they are playing over NT and west - well.....) wouldn't that type of comment be a violation of ACBL zero-tolerance policy?

[blackshoe]

Everybody knows the ACBL's Zero Tolerance policy exists. Nobody knows for sure when it applies, particularly at club level. Even for sectionals and regionals, the regulations in force are rarely published on site or in the tournament flyer.

[matmat]

blackshoe, on Jul 23 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

Everybody knows the ACBL's Zero Tolerance policy exists. Nobody knows for sure when it applies, particularly at club level. Even for sectionals and regionals, the regulations in force are rarely published on site or in the tournament flyer.

oh. i thought it applied whenever the director in charge found it convenient to penalize a player they didn't like.

[glen]

ArtK78, on Jul 23 2008, 07:56 AM, said:

... When LHO bid 2♣, I commented on the chat line "it is not nice to bid on your partner's hesitation." ...

I dislike this type of table action

[brianshark]

It doesn't matter if you can't tell the source of the hesitation because the hesitation is not the illegal action. Acting based on the hesitation is, and it is very easy to make a judgement call on that. The ACBL decision seems like a bit of a cop out.

Having said that, there are always going to be issues with the integrity of online bridge. It's just not the same game as face to face. So just use it for practice, play in teams matches with friends whom you can trust not to cheat/be unethical and try not to take results from the MBC and tournaments too seriously.

[FrancesHinden]

ArtK78, on Jul 23 2008, 12:56 PM, said:

When LHO bid 2♣, I commented on the chat line "it is not nice to bid on your partner's hesitation." I know that we never get redress for this kind of behavior, so I wanted to let my LHO know that I disapproved of his action sight unseen. Interestingly enough, neither opponent said anything. Normally, in this situation, one of them protests that there was no hesitation.

If someone makes a comment like that to me in the middle of the auction or play I always ignore it.

Whatever the ethics of EW, it's a pretty rude thing to say and totally unjustified. Perhaps he had the most obvious action in the history of the game?

Quote

Regardless of the result, I thought that this was the most incredible example of a hesitation conveying UI and taking advantage of the UI that I have ever seen.

What a sheltered life you seem to have led.

[onoway]

When you say, " normally in this sort of situation" ....etc. you seem to imply you often make such comments. The OTHER side of the coin is the rudeness of players who constantly are haranguing players to hurry up, although there may be no especial reason to do so. There are many reasons for a hesitation..a sticky mouse being a very common one which is at least as frustrating to the player as to the opps waiting. It seems to me that someone who goes looking for problems generally finds them whether they are there or not.

[Rossoneri]

Your comment reminds me of some cheating allegation a certain country's NPC made while playing against 2 junior players from another country.

And like what the others said, there are just too many reasons for hesitations while playing online.

[ArtK78]

So, I guess all of you think that the balance on KJ9xx of hearts and out is perfectly normal and would be made by a vast majority of players given the same set of circumstances and no break in tempo.

[qwery_hi]

HeavyDluxe, on Jul 23 2008, 09:11 AM, said:

This does make me wonder why BBO doesn't 'stall' partner and RHO's bids in the display - simulating the concept of screens.

This isn't a criticism, just an idea.  What prompted me thinking about was the VuGraph for one of the pre-NABC junior sessions.  Jlall was the operator, and he was entering bids two at a time to not give away any information.

It should be a simple thing to do something similar in 'high level' tourneys on BBO.  If someone is *really* stalling, their 'screenmate' could call the director.  But that would make it so I wouldn't know who was in the tank/lagging - partner or opps.

This idea is probably chock full of holes... But, just thinkin'.

I like this idea. The sw also needs to be modified so that during the auction, only NE and SW are able to talk to each other.

EDIT - Come to think of it, this would also be good for alerts like in real life.

[hrothgar]

qwery_hi, on Jul 23 2008, 10:43 PM, said:

HeavyDluxe, on Jul 23 2008, 09:11 AM, said:

This does make me wonder why BBO doesn't 'stall' partner and RHO's bids in the display - simulating the concept of screens.

This isn't a criticism, just an idea.   What prompted me thinking about was the VuGraph for one of the pre-NABC junior sessions.  Jlall was the operator, and he was entering bids two at a time to not give away any information.

It should be a simple thing to do something similar in 'high level' tourneys on BBO.  If someone is *really* stalling, their 'screenmate' could call the director.  But that would make it so I wouldn't know who was in the tank/lagging - partner or opps.

This idea is probably chock full of holes... But, just thinkin'.

I like this idea. The sw also needs to be modified so that during the auction, only NE and SW are able to talk to each other.

EDIT - Come to think of it, this would also be good for alerts like in real life.

I've seen this suggestion discussed a number of times.
I think that it is problematic.

When I am playing without screens I get to watch each bid in "real time". When LHO makes a bid I get to start thinking about what hand types LHO has shown and consider possible responses.

In a similar vein, when CHO takes a call, I incorporate this information into my decision making process. When RHO finally makes a call, I've already done most of my thinking.

Lets consider the situation in which I am shielded from any/all information until RHO makes a bid. I now have an enormous amount of information dumped inot my lap. I am going to need a lot of time to process what's going on.

First, this will slow down the game a lot

Second, this exacerbates issues with tempo - players who are frustrated with the pace of the game are going to bid quickly when they have nothing to think about but be forced to take enormous tanks when they have complicated hands.

For what its worth, I don't think that screens were ever intended to deal with tempo issues. I think that the mechanics behind using screens represent a compromise between blocking Line of Sight between partners and ease of use.

[jtfanclub]

ArtK78, on Jul 23 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

So, I guess all of you think that the balance on KJ9xx of hearts and out is perfectly normal and would be made by a vast majority of players given the same set of circumstances and no break in tempo.

Nope. Definitely wouldn't say that. But you didn't know he had that when he made his 2♣ bid, did you?

I would certainly adjust directing Addicts. I guess the ACBL doesn't.

[ArtK78]

jtfanclub, on Jul 23 2008, 03:38 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 23 2008, 02:16 PM, said:

So, I guess all of you think that the balance on KJ9xx of hearts and out is perfectly normal and would be made by a vast majority of players given the same set of circumstances and no break in tempo.

Nope. Definitely wouldn't say that. But you didn't know he had that when he made his 2♣ bid, did you?

But I knew, through experience and table feel (and table feel does exist online) that my LHO was acting on his partner's hesitation. I stated it at the time of the bid and I was right. I just did not recognize how eggregious the action was.

I recognize that my comment was technically out of line and a violation of zero tolerance. But it was also 100% correct. I am very tired of the rampant unethical behavior that exists in the online games, and standing by silently is not going to do anything to correct the problem.

I note that the TD did not reprimand me for my comment. I guess the accuracy of my observation had something to do with it.

[jillybean]

ArtK78, on Jul 23 2008, 01:58 PM, said:

I am very tired of the rampant unethical behavior that exists in the online games, and standing by silently is not going to do anything to correct the problem.

(off topic)

Heh money and egos don’t coexist very well with ethics
People strive to accumulate the first and forgo the latter.

[DrTodd13]

In the bridge system I wrote, I implemented this delay of the previous two bids. It is a pretty simple thing to do. In practice, where people wouldn't ever pause for thought this system wouldn't slow you down because there would be a quick pass in there. Personally, I am happy with slowing things down a bit to coerce more ethical behavior from people in contested auctions. I don't understand people who get impatient and start screaming for you to bid if you want 5 seconds. If you are that impatient then you shouldn't play intellectual games.

You have the opportunity to greatly improve disclosure with technology so artificially restricting explanations only going to your virtual screenmate is silly. Just explain your own bids in private to both opps and we eliminate all the director issues where different explanations are given on different sides of the screen.

I might quibble a little bit with the tone of the message that he delivered to his opponent but don't the new laws that just went into effect allow you to say "I have observed a hesitation from your pd and based on bridge law, I reserve the right to call director if I later believe that you have disregarded a logical alternative based on hesitation UI"? This both puts on record that you feel there has been a hesitation and informs them that they are not supposed to use that hesitation to make their call. Many people may simply be ignorant of this fact.