[Kaitlyn S]

 nige1, on 2016-September-29, 19:51, said:

[/b][/i]Except, perhaps, at trick one, however, he shouldn't think about the play of a singleton.

I'd like to talk about this, because this is a very large part of why I don't play tournament bridge anymore and haven't for years.

Partner led against 3NT, and I thought about the hand for maybe 15 seconds before playing my singleton. At trick 6 or so when I showed out, an argument ensued, with my point being that if I don't think, partner will have the UI that I have a singleton because I always think third hand. I stated that somebody needed to be educated.

Well, the one who was educated was me. My pleas that I would be giving partner UI fell on deaf ears. Partner was so upset at what was being said that she had forgotten the play of the cards when play resumed and gave up a trick and many matchpoints.

I went to the head director after the game and explained my situation. (Not trying to get any MP back, but trying to understand why the rules would force me to give my partner UI.) He said firmly, "you are not allowed to take time with a singleton." That made absolutely no sense to me, and I really didn't see playing any game where the rules don't make sense. That was the last straw for me as far as tournament bridge was concerned. I haven't been back since.

Your comment "perhaps at trick one" makes me think that I was given bad information by the director and the head director. Am I right? Should I have started a new thread?

[pran]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-30, 10:52, said:

I'd like to talk about this, because this is a very large part of why I don't play tournament bridge anymore and haven't for years.

Partner led against 3NT, and I thought about the hand for maybe 15 seconds before playing my singleton. At trick 6 or so when I showed out, an argument ensued, with my point being that if I don't think, partner will have the UI that I have a singleton because I always think third hand. I stated that somebody needed to be educated.

Well, the one who was educated was me. My pleas that I would be giving partner UI fell on deaf ears. Partner was so upset at what was being said that she had forgotten the play of the cards when play resumed and gave up a trick and many matchpoints.

I went to the head director after the game and explained my situation. (Not trying to get any MP back, but trying to understand why the rules would force me to give my partner UI.) He said firmly, "you are not allowed to take time with a singleton." That made absolutely no sense to me, and I really didn't see playing any game where the rules don't make sense. That was the last straw for me as far as tournament bridge was concerned. I haven't been back since.

Your comment "perhaps at trick one" makes me think that I was given bad information by the director and the head director. Am I right? Should I have started a new thread?

This surprises me, unless Declarer first delayed his play to trick one by approximately 10 seconds.

Although I am too busy at the moment to search laws, minutes and regulations I know that somewhere have I seen a rule on this.

It says something like: It is correct procedure by declarer to take a break of approximately 10 seconds after Dummy has been faced before he plays from Dummy to trick one. And if he plays earlier to trick one then his RHO is entitled to compensate for this by taking a break giving him a total time of approximately 10 seconds for considerations before he plays to this trick.

This rule is (to my knowledge) enforced rather strictly where I play or direct, I cannot think that it is purely a Norwegian "invention", and I don't believe anybody here would be ruled against from hesitating like that to trick one even with a singleton in the suit led.


Edit: I stumbled across this regulation while preparing for a tournament tomorrow. It is part of our STOP regulation and states that STOP procedure is compulsory when playing to trick one after Dummy's hand is faced. The specified delay is "between 10 and 15 seconds" (from the moment Dummy's hand was faced), and this part of our STOP regulation came into force on July 1st 2011.

[axman]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-30, 10:52, said:

I'd like to talk about this, because this is a very large part of why I don't play tournament bridge anymore and haven't for years.

Partner led against 3NT, and I thought about the hand for maybe 15 seconds before playing my singleton. At trick 6 or so when I showed out, an argument ensued, with my point being that if I don't think, partner will have the UI that I have a singleton because I always think third hand. I stated that somebody needed to be educated.

Well, the one who was educated was me. My pleas that I would be giving partner UI fell on deaf ears. Partner was so upset at what was being said that she had forgotten the play of the cards when play resumed and gave up a trick and many matchpoints.

I went to the head director after the game and explained my situation. (Not trying to get any MP back, but trying to understand why the rules would force me to give my partner UI.) He said firmly, "you are not allowed to take time with a singleton." That made absolutely no sense to me, and I really didn't see playing any game where the rules don't make sense. That was the last straw for me as far as tournament bridge was concerned. I haven't been back since.

Your comment "perhaps at trick one" makes me think that I was given bad information by the director and the head director. Am I right? Should I have started a new thread?

Each side is typically allotted 3 1/2 minutes on average to bid, play, and score a hand. It is sage to use your time wisely. If you need 10sec, 20 sec, 30sec at T1 you ought to take** it prior to playing your card- and it should not prejudice your side regarding UI or improper deception....improper delay of game is a different matter.

** presuming that you maintain your practice; I think the Norwegian regulation specifying 10sec is out of line- All hands are not equal and it makes for inequity to treat them so.

[lamford]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-30, 10:52, said:

my point being that if I don't think, partner will have the UI that I have a singleton because I always think third hand.

You were right and the TD was wrong. If you always think third in hand at trick one, then playing immediately with a singleton would be wrong. It is the variation in tempo that is relevant.

[sfi]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-September-30, 10:52, said:

Your comment "perhaps at trick one" makes me think that I was given bad information by the director and the head director. Am I right?

Yes, you are right. It's common and accepted practice to think at trick one, and little or nothing should be read into a break of tempo here. It seems the discussion may have gotten out of hand at the table, but I would not have expected anyone to claim or receive an adjustment on the facts stated.

On the other hand, you can still show doubt about which card to play from actions other than tempo. Doing so could lead to the ruling you received.

It's worth saying - and this is relevant to the original post - that singletons should be played in tempo. This means they should also not be played too quickly, and the time taken in the original situation may actually have simply been normal tempo.

[blackshoe]

"Normal" tempo in the middle of a hand, absent skip bids, is about 3 to 5 seconds for most people, and 1-2 for some. For one of my partners, it's about 5 to 10 seconds. "Normal" tempo at trick one is 10 to 20 seconds by declarer playing from dummy and third hand. That is, if declarer thinks for 10 seconds at trick one, third hand thinking for another 10 is still in tempo. Numbers are rough estimates, especially wrt trick one. The point is that you are allowed time to think about the whole hand, even with a singleton.

Fast play of a singleton at trick one screams "I have a singleton!" Directors (and players) often overlook that.

[Kaitlyn S]

 blackshoe, on 2016-September-30, 21:59, said:

Fast play of a singleton at trick one screams "I have a singleton!" Directors (and players) often overlook that.

That was my exactly point to the director and head director. Now, a director can have certain ideas, a lapse in judgment, or be swayed by the fact that my opponents were friends, but the head director IMO should never ever give a completely wrong impression of a rule - at the very least, he should say "I think you're wrong but let me check with ACBL headquarters and get back to you." This was a regional tournament for goodness sake, the head director should be one of the best in the country!

The net result of the head director's firmness was to give me an idea that despite playing in Flight A, I really didn't understand the rules of the game well enough to continue to play it, or that the rules just made absolutely no sense and why would I play a game where the rules make no sense?

Even if the head director had said "IN MY tournament you must not think before playing a singleton as defender", it would leave open the possibility that common sense prevailed except when he was in charge, which is a pretty awful situation, but still better than common sense never prevailing.