From: ted@welchgate.welch.jhu.edu (Ted Ying)
Subject: Re: hesitating with a singleton
Organization: Johns Hopkins Univ. Welch Medical Library
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 18:07:12 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.123143.2550@rayssd.ssd.ray.com> sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Myerson) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.183647.29084@leland.Stanford.EDU> daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao) writes:
>
>DS: Suppose partner has made an opening lead in a suit in which you have
>DS: a singleton, and your usual practice is to spend a few moments
>DS: studying the dummy.  Declarer plays a card almost immediately after
>DS: seeing the dummy.  Do you have to play the singleton at the 
>DS: fastest pace at which you play a card, or can you take your usual
>DS: time after the opening lead?
>
>You may take your time. If prodded by an impatient declarer, just say
>"I need just a few seconds to study the dummy and plan the defense."
>You may want to get in the habit of taking the same amount of
>time when defending.
>
	Hmmm...I agree as long as you are not sure what you intend to play.
	If you know what you are intending to play, then play that card and
	just do not turn the card over until you are done thinking.  Now if
	prodded by an overanxious declarer you can respond with the above
	comment.  My problem is that often a person will pause at the first
	trick when there is no problem at all with the first trick.  As the
	declarer, I would really appreciate also having the information of the
	first trick so that I can think about the hand.  When you hesitate
	before playing to the first trick, you should be hesitating because
	the first trick may require some attention before playing to it.  If
	it doesn't, then kindly allow me to see the whole first trick and then
	determine my line of play.  Many people think about the whole hand
	first and then play to the trick when they knew all along what card
	they were going to play.  Then they get irritated when I need some
	extra time to determine my line of play when I had to consider several
	extra lines of play without being able to see the first trick.

>DS: It seems to me that if you must play as fast as possible, you
>DS: automatically tell both partner and declarer what you holding is
>DS: if they are familiar with your habits.
>DS: 
>DS: It also seems to me that later in the play there can be situations
>DS: where allowing pauses would minimize the inferences that a defender
>DS: could draw about his partner's holdings.  For instance, if declarer
>DS: plays two rounds of trump, partner capturing the second round, and
>DS: you started with two trumps, then a pause by partner would always
>DS: imply he has at least one more.  And why would he want to pause with
>DS: only one card left?  Perhaps he wants to think about his discards
>DS: should declarer run the rest of the trumps.  But my understanding
>DS: about the rules is that one can never pause later in the play when
>DS: you have no choice about which card to play.
>
>Cards should always be played in the same tempo.
>
	Correct.  Dave says that "...if you must play as fast as possible..."
	and believes that this requires you to immediately plunk down a
	card.  This does not stop you from pausing a second or two to look
	at your cards and play the one you have.

>If you have one card remaining in a suit, and declared leads that suit,
>but you want to think for a minute, place your card face down on
>the table (in tempo), do your thinking, and then turn your card over.
>This way, it will be obvious that you are not thinking about which card
>to play, but rather about something else (such as, Should I return partner's
>suit when I get in? Why did I double? Where should we go for dinner? etc).
>
	My only problem with this is that if you are going to place your
	card face down, why not face up?  If you might change it...you
	shouldn't be pulling it from your hand...playing it face down and then
	replacing it later is also unauthorized information to partner and
	opponent that you have (at least) two options on what to play and
	chose one but replaced it...therefore both options have merit.  If
	you know what you are going to play then play it face up.

	In addition to this, when you play it face up, and pause *AFTER*
	playing then you allow all 3 people at the table (excluding dummy) the
	opportunity to think about further developments of the hand
	simultaneously rather than in parallel.  I find that this helps to
	keep a game running more smoothly than without.

	I've also noted that many of the top American players tend to do this.
	They tend to play cards as soon as they know which one they will play
	and then leave the card face up until they know what they will do
	after that trick.

	Ted Ying			ted@welch.jhu.edu

#include <std.disclaimer.h>

	Tommy Thrush: "Captain Buffalo, I'm hungry, can we eat now?"
	Captain Buffalo: "Well, alright Tommy, how about here?  They
		have a special on Buffalo Wings."
	Tommy: "Can I get the Mud-pie?  It comes with a special Mudman
		action figure!"
	Captain Buffalo: "Hmmmm...."