Hesitation (1)

East opens 1♠, South – pass, West – 1NT, North – 2♣, East – 2, South – 2, West – 3. North then hesitates for a long time and passes. South now bids 3 on:

♠ QJxx
♣ xx

The auction then proceeds: 4 by West, passed out, and the result was -1.


Can South justify bidding 3 after the long hesitation?

Should the director (called) have disallowed the 3 bid, and adjusted the score to 3 making?

Mike Baker – Haverfordwest

1 Reply to “Hesitation (1)”

  1. It is always difficult to know how to answer the question whether South can justify a call after unauthorised information (in this case a hesitation) from partner. Maybe he did not notice the hesitation. Maybe he thought his 3 call was automatic. Maybe he did not think partner’s hesitation suggested bidding 3. So maybe South can justify it, maybe not.

    Should the director have disallowed the 3 bid? Certainly, pass is a logical alternative, i.e. it is a call that many people would consider and some would choose. Furthermore, 3 is suggested over ‘pass’ by the hesitation. So the 3 bid should be disallowed, which means a ruling of 3 making. This is not a close decision: it is quite obvious.


Leave a Reply