jillybean

And herein, I believe lies the problem. West's action after being given MI or a failure to disclose an agreement should not be in question. West should not be restricted to the mainstream approach after his opponents have committed an infraction. A poll is totally appropriate when a player is in possession of UI but I think we have lost sight of the infraction when we apply Director beliefs/logic or the results of a poll to the NOS.

Whoa, I think it is unwise and a far stretch to imply a racist influence to this auction. It's a bad bad, it's a terrible bid but inexperienced players holding AAQ want to bid.

So how do you rule?

What I mean by "no fault of their own" is that Laws are voluntary reading, there is no requirement to understand the Laws other than the rudimentary mechanics, following suit and making sufficient bids. I'm beginning to believe that what players learn about UI problems is that it is minor distraction, the NOS are considered guilty and the OS receive a "stern warning". Penalties won't happen at any club game or sectional tournament and by the time you get to the tournament level where procedural or disciplinary penalties may be used the players have no history, the Director encounters this for the first time, no PP, DP I asked a long time bridge player here, have you ever seen any DP or PP? Yes, for mouthing off at the Director. Nothing for UI/MI? No, but boards do get adjusted. Another player told me today of the warning of a penalty when playing in the Blue Ribbon Pairs and they had failed to alert, twice. The player admitted they had 78 pages of agreements and neither of them knew their system.

Pass is the most difficult bid to master.

I think you may be overestimating their understanding of the laws and UI. It is apparent that they do not understand the laws concerning disclosure and through no fault of their own, I doubt that they have any understanding of UI and the use thereof. I am not sure what you mean by they will get what is coming to them, unless I beat them up after the game. Here's the full hand [hv=pc=n&s=st7h5dat8432ckt86&w=sk95432hqt72dcq53&n=sqjhkj93dkj97cj74&e=sa86ha864dq65ca92&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1n(12-14)p2s(range%20find)p2np3dpp(%3F)p]399|300[/hv]

I don't fully understand this. You have been told that 2♠ was a rangefinder, 2NT we assume, is the signoff. Now South bids 3♦ and North fumbles with a quasi alert. Is North unsure if 3♦ is alertable, doesn't know what it is, was 2♠ rangefinder or slam interest, or relay to a long suit? Do you really want to ask and give the opponents the chance to clarify their auction? The previous round of bidding was the time for you to bid, if the explanation of 2♠ was incorrect, the damage has already been done.

Other than calling for the Director, West did not say anything at the table. Does East have any UI and is the UI created by the MI?

a. Spades b. West considers the hand is not good enough to X over an invitational hand but would act if 2♠ could also be relay to long suit.

[hv=pc=n&w=sk95432hqt72dcq53&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1n(12-14)p2s(**)p2np3dppp]133|200[/hv] (Open game) 1NT 12-14, 2♠ alerted and when asked, explained as inquiring about openers strength North paused after 3♦ and made the comment, I'm not sure if I should alert 3♦ At the end of the Auction West places card face down on table, any questions?, no, card is led South now says 2♠ was inquiry or long suit. West calls the Director and tells you that they would have doubled 2♠ with the full explanation. How do you rule?

We play this way now in our games, no alerts, explanations, system cards.

Thanks but nothing is easy. 😃 I will have to draw it all out

We hope to soon be able to duplicate boards for the 18-20 table, 24 board game we are running, we could play 26 boards. I obviously would like to try web movements and it appears that webs are relatively easy for an even number of tables but get more complex when accommodating 2 sections with an uneven number of tables or a half table where an external web is required? To start with, perhaps we will only introduce a web movement when we have an even number of tables. Any advice is much appreciated!

Yes, when you signon click Casual Under "Play or Watch Bridge" and then Take me to an interesting table under "Help me find a game - Watch" An upvote for mycroft's creative reply

If the prescribed one or two trick restoration to the non offender does not restore equity then the Director attempts to reconstruct the hand without the revoke(s). Does this reconstruction involve only piecing the hand back together involving legal play already made, or obvious play. In the case of a revoke involving trump, Declarer, having assumed one opponent has all the trumps is not required to continue playing trump in a reconstruction but the Director does not "play" the hand out. If there is any choice or doubt to the play then you would have to say the board is unable to be restored and award an artificial adjusted score?