This is what a top New Zealand player, administrator and teacher (Alan Turner QSM) said to a Directors’ class I attended many years ago.
What followed was his excellent summary of the Laws and NZ Bridge Guidance on Hesitations. I have checked that it still reflects the current Law (it does) and recite it here (The bolding etc is Alan’s):
“A player is entitled to hesitate in the course of the bidding
- They may be marshalling their thoughts
- Considering previous bidding
- Remembering the system notes, etc
However, they may not hesitate to try and suggest possibilities to partners or opponents;
A hesitation is NOT ILLEGAL and no player can be accused of hesitating!
It is not a crime except for trying to suggest something to partner
However, the partner of the player who has hesitated is in the spotlight!
If they choose an action that could have been suggested by their partner’s hesitation they have then committed an offence;
In other words, their action must be beyond reproach and clearly indicated by their hand rather than partner’s hesitation.
The best way to judge if this action is OK is to ask this simple question:
‘Would 75% of players of their peer group take the same action?’
If the answer is YES then they have not been influenced by the hesitation
If the answer is NO then they have been influenced by the hesitation
In the latter case then you as Director will adjust the score”
If your opponent has clearly hesitated their partner does NOT have to pass.
If you are fearful that a disadvantage may result, you should reserve the right to summon the Director later. Don’t wait until the hand is over to raise concerns. (In Open Tournaments that I play in, it is common for a player to simply say “can we agree that there was a hesitation?” The reserving of rights is implicit.)
