[qwery_hi]

Regarding this law -

Law 73D. 1. Variations in tempo or manner
It is desirable, though not always required, for players to maintain steady tempo and unvarying manner. However, players should be particularly careful when variations may work to the benefit of their side. Otherwise, unintentionally to vary the tempo or manner in which a call or play is made is not in itself an infraction. inferences from such variation may appropriately be drawn only by an opponent and at his own risk.

If one is not supposed to make inferences from opponents hesitations (like in this thread http://www.bridgebas...a-bit-deceived/ ), or rather if one makes inferences at ones own risk, isn't it lame to later ask for an adjustment because of any inferences made by the hesitation?

In other words, any time a declarer hesitates while in the middle of a trick, it would be "safe" to do the anti percentage action and then claim that you were influenced by the hesitation, wouldn't it?

[VixTD]

qwery_hi, on 2011-July-14, 02:01, said:

In other words, any time a declarer hesitates while in the middle of a trick, it would be "safe" to do the anti percentage action and then claim that you were influenced by the hesitation, wouldn't it?

But you said yourself that the law allows you to draw conclusions from opponents' mannerisms (hesitations, etc.) only at your own risk. So if you draw the wrong conclusion you have no redress unless....

Quote

[Law 73F]....if the Director determines that an innocent player
has drawn a false inference from a remark, manner, tempo, or the like, of an
opponent who has no demonstrable bridge reason for the action, and who
could have known, at the time of the action, that the action could work to
his benefit, the Director shall award an adjusted score

So if declarer had a legitimate reason for thinking at that point, you have no grounds to claim damage.

[jmcw]

Variation in tempo and mannerism occur on just about every bid and trick played. The degree and circumstance of variation is what may influence an opponent to conclude certain inferences from the break in tempo.

Ignore mannerisms and breaks in tempo (opponents and partners), play or defend the hand as if in a vaccuum and don't go crying to the director when you mistakenly read breaks incorrectly. If, on the other hand, you "study" the opponents timing and demeanor then do so at your own peril.

[ggwhiz]

I'm no expert but from gordontd (who is) in the other thread.

Quote

we need to consider the other conditions for an adjustment - did it damage an innocent opponent

The Director is allowed to rule the damage as self inflicted and off to committee you go.

[barmar]

It's a tricky balancing act.

The "at your own risk" caveat refers to guessing wrongly about what the opponent was thinking about. But the player who goes into the tank still has to have a legitimate reason to think -- 73F prohibits coffeehousing.

[peachy]

barmar, on 2011-July-14, 19:22, said:

It's a tricky balancing act.

The "at your own risk" caveat refers to guessing wrongly about what the opponent was thinking about. But the player who goes into the tank still has to have a legitimate reason to think -- 73F prohibits coffeehousing.

Agree on all. And any coffeehouser who did it without legitimate bridge reason AND opponents are misled, will not get away with it by saying he was daydreaming (or whatever) if the situation was tempo-sensitive.

[mycroft]

As well as anyone who *was* daydreaming or whatever, who had no intention whatever of coffeehousing. That's the Law, and much better the game is for it.

And the ruling to both is likely to be in the same words (even though the emphasis might be different). Usually the ones who one is likely to think possible to be skirting the ethical boundary hear the "we're sure you would never do that..." appropriately, just as those who one would never believe would try anything hear the same phrase appropriately.

Also, if declarer does have a legitimate bridge reason for her tempo, which just happens not to be the reason you thought (or, because of skill level differences, not a legitimate bridge reason for you!) - well, that's where the "at one's own risk" comes in.

[AlexJonson]

In the real world not much of this stuff about hesitation matters a jot. There are a few well known situations and the rest is imaginary discussion on the forum or random judgement.

This post (OP! - edit) is interesting and deserves replies from experts.