Chainat

A normal live bridge event in Thailand, where ACBL laws are used. West admitted both the hesitation as well as the throwing of the card. I'd consider west to be among the top twenty players in the country.

[hv=pc=n&s=sq53h7654daj975cj&w=shkqt93dt2ckqt532&n=sa862h82d864ca764&e=skjt974hajdkq3c98&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1sp2hp2sp3cp3hp4hppp&p=d6dqdad2cjckcac8d8dkd5dthah4h3h2hjh6hqh8hks2s4h5hts6s7h7c2c4c9d7sks3h9s8cqc6s9s5ctc7d3d9c5d4stsqc3sasj]399|300[/hv] The lead was take by ♦ace - and as it is everything looks like a club switch. What north doesn't know, the jack is a singleton. Furthermore, if it was ♣J10, the ♣ 7 looks good. And the diamond lead looked like a terrific lead so ♦ again, end of play. What happened was: After the lead was taked with ♦ ace, south looked for the best option, and returned a club. West then, hand to think what to do! West was thinking, sitting and wondering what to do for about 20 seconds, before throwing in the king. West is a very good player. I asked west: "What's there to think about"? "I was thinking if I should play the king or the queen, to confuse north". What's your comments? Thanks. - results stands, due to north's arguments above, but I said to west that it is absolutely not allowed - it is not in the best interst of the game.

I played online as sub, with an unknown partner against a Slovakian pair playing precision. They opened 1♠, I passed - so did openers partner, and as my partner bid 1NT - opener wrote in public chat that they were playing presicion. Opener re-bid 2♠, and I bid 4♥. (no clue about transfer or not at this stage) I don't know enough precision to know all details, and as I was playing the board, I was still in the SAYC/ACOL/2over1 world. The guy who had passed 1♠ had already shown KJ in spades, and was therefore not to be able to hold king of hearts - which I then tried to top out. I was quite surprised when the guy passing a 1♠ opening bid now had 7 pts. Afterwards I asked the TD - not to change the scores - but simply to enourage an alert on the pass bid. I do believe that 1♠ with a point range 11-15 (16) should/must be alerted as well. (Ok - the guy informed us of the presicion system) The TD did not really get my point. In a "normal" system, a pass to an opening bid shows 0-5 pts. But in this case - the responder already knows that a game seems impossible - as his partner has a maximum of 15 (16) points - and therefore passes with 7 pts. What do you say? Alert or not? Btw - a funny 1NT my partner found there..... Would you had fallen into "the trap", just as I did? [/hv][hv=pc=n&s=skjhk54dt8ct97653&w=s53haj63dk5cakq84&n=saq87642h8da632c2&e=st9hqt972dqj974cj&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1spp1n2s4hppp]399|300|No alerts, but after the 1NT bid - north informed all that they were playing precision.[/hv]

Hi I played on BBO, a matchpoint tournament, and a board comes up. The result doesn't matter to me, but WHETHER the opponent should alert the 1♠ bid or not? W __ N __ E __ S pass 1♦ * pass 1♠ all pass * 1♦ was alerted - showing 11 to 15 points - and 2 or more ♦. Of course I know that something was going on - either north had a tricky opening - or as it was the case 1♠ had a limit of points (which of course I could imagine because of the 1♦ alert). But I don't think it is neither mine or my partner's job to know our opponents bidding system. Before my final pass - I clicked the 1♠ bid, and got the reply - natural with spades - 2-3 times. I then asked in private - if there was a limit on the 1♠ bid - and got the reply - 3 to 10 points. I believe my partner should know of such information before his bid, by an alert from the opponent. (Yes it can be cleared afterwards with the assistance of the TD) I passed - maybe I should had bid 1NT - but I didn't. Again - it is not the result I am interested in. I called the TD - only to get to know if the bid should had been alerted or not. The TD lectured me that it was already alerted. (That is a problem in the BBO software - as soon as you ask for the meaning of a bid - and opponents are answering it - it becomes highlighted - as IF it had been alerted) I don't think I need to say that the TD said it of course should not be alerted. I still disagree. How about you? I have posted the hand as well - though I don't really think it matters. Looking forward to your comments. Thank You. The TD - said that I was more than welcome to ask here - and that I should return to her with the result, to tell her that I was wrong - and I should remember to point out that 1♠ doesn't need an alert.[hv=pc=n&s=st753hjt4dj94ca52&w=skqhak82dt8762ct3&n=s962hq963dk3ckqj8&e=saj84h75daq5c9764&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1dp1sppp]399|300|1 D alerted - 11-15 2+ D[/hv]

Hi When calling a TD for a missing alert I have often found that the TD tells me that the bid has been alerted. Unfortunatelly - when I click on the bid to ask for the meaning - the bid is now highlighted as it had been alerted. Is it possible for BBO to make it clear when it has been alerted (eg. one colour) - and when been asked for (another colour). As it is now - when I have asked for the bid, and the opponent is either answering it - or leaving it as no information availbale a TD is assuming that the bid was alerted. Thanks

You are absolutely right. I was taught a lesson continously for about 20 minutes after the board finished - that it was beginners mistake that I made. As you already mentioned - I bid 1NT - which I hope that every player would do. I really can't see any other option, but my "dear" partner believes that 2♥ is mandatory. Upon the jump to 3NT - I bid 4 ♥, and after I believe 3 minutes thinking a pass finally came up. I believe a question regarding that bid would be a great topic! :rolleyes: As well as for: 1♠ - 1 NT 2 minor - ?? Own ♥suit or the doubleton preference to ♠ or........

Your partner opens 1 ♠, what will you bid with the following hand? [hv=pc=n&s=s65hqt9863dkq6c85&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp]133|200[/hv] I thought bidding was so easy, but I was taught a lesson. :-)

I may have made a mistake in my questioning - If you were called to a table - in any kind of tournament what would you rule? BUT - yes the big problem is - in such a tournament there most likely wouldn't be anything to rule, as the one "forgetting" to alert - is the one who simply bid 6H and misunderstood the bid. He hasn't done anything wrong - he simply followed what he thought was right. So - imagine - that the case is that they should know the system - an self-alert etc....

Thanks - I couldn't find the actual hand, so I had to try to remember how it actually looked like. I forgot my old account in here so it took some days before I posted it. Regarding the explanation - it was written when the declarer told us that it was a splint bid and he forgot, and realized it as his partner converted the 6 H to 6 S. Anyway online - it is the player who bids the artificial bid that has to alert, and explain his own bid. We did not at all feel that he was willing to do so. Thanks for the comments.

I played TM tourney on BBO. The bidding went: 1♦ - 1 ♠ 3♥ - 6 ♥ 6 ♠ The guy in lead is asking the dummy, who bid 3 ♥, what does the 3 ♥ show? Around 5 times: No information available, though it was his own bid. The lead was then a ♥, declarer quickly got rid of his clubs. Declarer telling the opponents that he forgot it was a splint-bid. The opponents claim the following: a 3 ♥ was not alerted - correct. b 3 ♥ was not explained - correct. c Opponents claim that IF the 3 ♥ bid had been alerted, they MAY have had the chance to double it, to get a ♥-lead, but by not doubling, suggesting another lead. d Opponents also claim that 6 ♠ could have been doubled to show a ♦ lead - first bid suit in dummy. e Opponents therefore, because of a-b-c-d say that they MAY have been taken away the chance to set the contract by a ♣ lead. (The king was in a dummy, opponent behind it holding AJ.) No double of the final contract MAY suggest NO ♦ lead, and no double of the 3♥ bid MAY suggest NO ♥ lead. Therefore a ♣ lead may seem reasonable. What is your call? If you need it.... The guy on lead had ♠ K6 ♥ 8765 ♦ J74 ♣ Q543