[flametree]

Defending 4S, you hold Axxxx of hearts say, with no other entries to your hand, and dummy on your left has KQx.

Dummy wins trick one, and has only four small trumps. Declarer leads a trump from dummy and partner wins it with the king. Partner now switches to the 7H, declarer plays low.

You take a while to think - if partner has AKx of trumps (possible from the bidding), then he may have a ruff coming in hearts. So has he led a singleton or a doubleton? If a singleton you need to win the ace and give him a ruff, if a doubleton you need to duck and hope he continues the suit when in with his ace of trumps. Declarer seems to have no way to shed a heart to avoid the ruff.

You think back to the auction, and realise that declarer pretty much denied a four-card heart suit. So partner has a doubleton rather than a singleton.

Only thing is, all this thinking (which yes, should have been done as soon as dummy came down) has taken 20 seconds or so. Since the only reason for such a pause is to decide whether to win the trick or not, if you do duck, is the UI that you do in fact have the ace a problem for partner? Or can partner carry on with his original plan of playing two hearts to get a ruff?

[RMB1]

flametree, on 2012-January-08, 16:20, said:

Since the only reason for such a pause is to decide whether to win the trick or not, if you do duck, is the UI that you do in fact have the ace a problem for partner?

Yes

flametree, on 2012-January-08, 16:20, said:

Or can partner carry on with his original plan of playing two hearts to get a ruff?

Yes, if there are no logical alternatives to playing to get a ruff.

[aguahombre]

Yes, you are giving UI. Yes, you should have thought earlier. Yes, this happens a lot. Yes, partner should have helped you.

If he had a singleton heart and AKX of trump he should win the Ace and lead his stiff heart, giving you less to think about. But with a doubleton heart, he should play as he did.

And, you might slide on the UI. But don't count on it. I definitely wouldn't feel good about it.

[the hog]

There is a lot of nonsense spoken about UI. You have every right to think.

[blackshoe]

Yes, you have every right to think. Yes, if you break tempo, that may constrain your partner's actions. May, not will. Note that breaking tempo is not in itself an infraction (deliberately so). Using UI, however, is an infraction. But when you break tempo, that's your partner's problem, not yours.

[aguahombre]

the hog, on 2012-January-08, 19:43, said:

There is a lot of nonsense spoken about UI. You have every right to think.

Of course you do, but as Blackshoe so eloqently stated above, it is the use of the UI which might be ruled upon; and we can expect adverse rulings some of the time, when this happens.

[Phil]

This situation comes up a lot.

If I encourage hearts after a hitch, I'm still hard-pressed to see how partner returning one can be a problem, but I suppose it depends on the actual layout.

What seems to be more of a problem is when we discourage after a hitch and partner works out we have the Ace because of our hesitation, or we encourage after a hitch when we don't hold the Ace (for whatever reason) and partner finds the right shift (for whatever reason).

[gordontd]

The problem comes when you don't have a card to unequivocally encourage, or if you don't play this situation as attitude.

[flametree]

Phil, on 2012-January-08, 21:31, said:

This situation comes up a lot.

If I encourage hearts after a hitch, I'm still hard-pressed to see how partner returning one can be a problem, but I suppose it depends on the actual layout.

Yes I realised that if it began 7-2-?? and I held AT943 and dummy KQ5 then I have an easy "encouraging" signal as there is no point playing a higher card. In which case there isn't a problem.

But what if it begins 7-8 or if dummy has KQ8? Now it seems hard for any card to be unequivocably encouraging.

[bluejak]

There will always be some difficult situations for players, whether in positions where they need to think, or in positions where their partner has thunk [ok, ok, thought]. But if the use of UI is allowed we ruin the game as it is now, players communicating with their partners in all sorts of ways. The concept of UI is not one the law-makers invented to make life difficult for players, it is merely an obvious rule based on the nature of the game. So if you get into a position where you will think and give UI to partner, tough, it happens, don't worry about it, that's life. And if you get into a position where partner gives you UI and you take a poor decision to be ethical or to follow the UI Laws, tough, it happens, don't worry about it, that's life.