Leaderboard

In the traditional case where immediately after the correction (at the wrong time), the hand goes up and "DIRECTOR!" (and yeah, I've done this a couple of times too), it is screamingly obvious that "I would have done something else if..." Now is that actually a problem, given that it was induced by the MI and by the failure to correct at the proper time? I don't think so. I've been known to be less than sympathetic to claims of "UI" when the response is "if you'd done things correctly, there wouldn't have been UI". Would the adjustment be based on "if West doubles 2♠, and East gets in, West having not led spades, isn't finding the switch auto?" Probably. So does it matter? Probably not. This is yet another argument, however, in favour of the EBU's advice: so, in this case, the person calling the TD should be South, and he should do it before correcting the explanation. Since the TD is already there, they can go through the motions without necessarily leaking information between defenders (or from defender to declarer). But of course, given the other "convenient" mistakes in procedure South has done, and given the consensus in the ACBL that "calling the director is the opponents' responsibility, if they (falsely) think there's a problem", failure to do this can reasonably be assumed.

If we take a finesse and it loses, they'll clear hearts and then we'll be down every time the ♣K is offside. I think I'd just play clubs from the top. If the opponents clear hearts we then have a guaranteed 9 tricks and free shot at 10 by taking the diamond then spade finesses into the safe hand.