English Bridge Union
ACs are most often asked to use their bridge judgement in Unauthorised Information (UI) rulings. A common theme is the break in tempo (BIT) or "hesitation" case. Before giving an adjustment, three conditions have to be satisfied:
Sadly we sometimes see rulings where the TD has adjusted without all three conditions satisfied. Consider this auction:
| West | North | East | South |
3 | Dbl | 4 | Dbl1 |
| 5 | ...6 2 | Pass | ? |
After the initial 'stop' for the 3 opening the next four calls could be extremely quick. What's more, most players are taught never to repeat their pre-empt so the 5 bid would come as quite a surprise and in any case, jumps to slam are never made quickly. On this auction one would be more likely to rule UI from a very quick 6 call; a slow one is 'in tempo'.
Now suppose you hold, at love all:
K 8 4
K J
A K 3
9 6 4 3 2| RHO | You | LHO | Partner |
| West | North | East | South |
| 21 | Pass | 3 | ...Dbl2 |
| Pass | ? |
What calls does a very slow double suggest?
Here's a good, simple rule for any AC: if you can't agree what action a BIT suggests, it doesn't demonstrably suggest anything. On the internet forum where this was posted the comments ranged from one member of the L&EC saying (to paraphrase) "if partner doubles slowly, he doesn't want me to pass", to another expert EBU referee who thought that "a slow double is most likely a strong balanced hand that is worried I shall bid too often"! The only conclusion I can draw is that, unless you know partner very well, you have no idea what he is thinking about and so any action should be permitted.
Finally, you are presented with this hand:
K Q 5 2
A Q
K Q 6 4 3
K 6Partner deals, and the auction so far is:
| Partner | RHO | You | LHO |
| West | North | East | South |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | Pass |
| 31 | Pass | 32 | Pass |
| 42 | Pass | 42 | Pass |
| ...53 | Pass | ? |
You have UI from partner's slow 5 bid that demonstrably suggests bidding on. In fact, you could argue that if opener denied the A when he bypassed 3 then you knew earlier that an ace is missing: if slam is obvious now, it was obvious last round. This argument suggests that any successful slam should be adjusted back to 5+1. Thinking about the auction this way is a good way to approach a ruling, and if your hand were any weaker then an adjustment could well be in order. However, here it is not really conceivable that slam is poor given the auction so far. Sometimes people do make 'mark-time' bids with no real purpose -- they just need time to get up the courage to bid a slam! Thus we can use our judgement here to rule that there is no LA to bidding 6, however slowly partner signs off.
