kgr

Given the discussions here, I would think that this appeal always has merit. I thought that an appeal has merit when the case is not clear-cut?BTW: thanks for the answers (you and others)

My statements in the 2nd quote were referring to the TD decision in the 1st quote. You are referring to a law to determine if there was MI or Mistaken Call. But in this case there is certainly no mistaken Call. I tried to make the point that if written questions and explanations are required, then is there a problem with asking what 5D is, if everybody agrees that it was asked? right

The error was related to the (possible) infraction. East assumed his partner has an A and planned his defense based on that.

Thank you for your answer! Please consider the point below: You could also argue that there was no discussion that E asked for the meaning of 5♦. So it doesn't matter that it was written or not. It also doesn't matter if he did ask any other questions without writing them during the hand or gave oral explanations of his passes or not. The discussion is about the explanation of 5♦. That explanation was not written and there is disagreement over it between E and N. Because it was not a written explanation we therefor assume the that there was MI.

About the hand where declarers play the misleading ♦Q in trick 1: Another point that the defender should realise is that declarer has 13 tricks is he has ♣AK, so the only setting trick can come from ♦K Edit: Another great post by Inquiry!!

Apparently this case was already decided upon some time ago, but the TD sent his decision to the Web master and it did get lost there and was never published. Below is the decision of the TD. Do you agree with it or do you think that an appeal has merit here? Facts West leads D2 for Q, K, and 4. In the second trick East plays CK for CA of South. The latter now claims 12 tricks. East claims that North explained 5D as one or four of the five aces. Because he therefore assumed that his partner had to have an Ace, he played CK instead of Diamonds. North states that he and his partner play 1430 as answer to RKC and that he also said that at the request of East. He wonders why North and South would bid 6S if South had only had one Ace. Arbitrage There is no agreement in the declarations of North and East concerning the meaning of South’s 5D. According to article 5.1 of the screen regulations, both the questions and answers to the questions have to be done in writing. This is apparently not done in this bidding. Therefore - because of contradictory statements – it is not possible to give due to the demand of OW to an arbitral score to them. Decision The result achieved at the table is maintained

Screens are even used in one lower division.We don't have the habit of using written explanations. We whisper the explanation. Probably written explanations are used in Honour division, but they are not used in lower divisions. (In the first half of this match I played at same side of the screen with a TD (has been international an maybe still is) and he also did not use written explanations. This match was only with Dutch speaking players. Probably written explanations are even more important when playing with Dutch & French speaking players I don't understand this question. These matches are played in the bridge club of the home team where screens are available.

I was sitting West, so I'm involved and no neutral TD. But I would follow mrdct reasoning. But one additional remark: In contrary to the regulations, nobody is using written explanations in our division so I would not include that regulation in handling this case.

Why do you rather believe N then E in here? BTW: I'm not claiming that N forgot their agreement, but simply misexplained it (like saying something you didn't really intend to say).

NS play that 5♦ is 3 or 0 aces. IF N gave explanation that 5♦ is 4 or 1 ace then it was MI.

(I already posted this case before, but with wrong/incomplete info and additional questions that were not relevant for the actual case. I'm reposting it hoping that I don't make any mistakes here. I will only post the case as exactly as I can, as it was sent to the TD.) This happened behind screens. N and E are on the same side of the screen. In our division we play without TD on site. The scoring sheet is sent to the league, together with below case. Teams [hv=pc=n&s=sk752hak3djt85ca3&w=s983h862d2cj97652&n=saqj64hqjt54daqct&e=sth97dk97643ckq84&d=s&v=n&b=5&a=1np2h(transfer)p2sp3hp4sp4np5dp6sppp]399|300[/hv] (I'm not sure of the spots or actual distribution of ♣-suit, but I think the relevant part of the hands is correct). West leads ♦2 (3rd/5th) and declarer plays ♦Q won by ♦K of East. East returns ♣K and South soon claims 12 tricks. - East says that he got the explanation from North of 5♦=4 or 1 aces of 5. - North says that he and his partner already play 41/30 for 20 years, so he thinks he gave the correct explanation. - West - at the other side of the screen - did get correct explanation from South of 5♦=3/0 aces of 5. - The CC's available to East and West - but not consulted by E at the table say 41/30. - East can work out that his partner can not have an Ace. But didn't really consider that after North's wrong explanation. East thought that West had either ♣A or ♥A. He returned a ♣ because West would always make ♥A if he had. East, being sure his partner had an ace, didn't think long over this. (normally East is a slow player who thinks long over most played cards). - At the other table, in the closed room, bidding and play on the 1st trick was the same, but with correct explanation and a diamond was returned at trick 2. - EW ended 2nd in 3th division (Belgium) with the same nbr of points as the 1st. The result of this ruling will decide who is champion in this division and promotes to 2nd division. NS did end last in this division. (as you see the declarer misplayed by playing ♦Q, but that doesn't matter for the case). What do you rule? ...If you don't change the result then EW will appeal and you get following extra info: (My partner didn't want to add following info in the description of the case because it was from another board and therefor irrelevant according to him): - In the first half North Did incorrectly bid on another board 4D iso 4C after 4NT ace asking & they were in 6S with 2 aces out. That was not against the same EW because tables were switched during the half.

I play the same, except: 1NT-(3C)-3S=xfer to 3NT without stop, but that is probably just another naming of the same bid. 1NT-(3H)-DBL=Takeout; We play that (3H)-DBL is transfer S, like you play after (1NT)-3H so maybe it is logic if we would do the same.

It also requires partner to duck the ♣Q

This came up in discussion with my partner: (3S)-4H-(4S)-?? - DBL: We agreed to play this as point. Not pure penalty, but kind of optional. Do you think that is best? - What is best use of 5C or 5D here? To play or cue?

I wondered because vulnerable this could have been costly. So should it be done vulnerable at IMPs as well or was the layout unlucky?

If there is an open place then I'd like to participate. Just let me know. (or as a reserve). (not available at CET business hours). (..and if there is a need for a pair then I can ask my regular partner.)

Both hands & bidding: [hv=pc=n&s=s82hqjdqt32cakqj2&n=sj53h942dakj5ct43&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1np3nppp]266|200[/hv] Opps can take the first 11 tricks (6♠ & 5♥) with best defense. The defense wasn't best: Small ♥ for RHO ♥K. RHO had ♥KTx and returned ♥T. LHO took ♥A and returned another ♥ for the 9 in dummy. ..I wondered if opening 1NT was ok.

Is there another site for only watching vugraph? maybe that works?

IMP's temas; all green [hv=pc=n&s=s82hqjdqt32cakqj2]133|100[/hv] What do you open and plan to rebid?

I play: 1♥=3c♥ forcing 2♥=4c♥ 12-14 1NT=12-14

Thanks for the feedback. I installed Dolphin. BBO is not giving an error, but only showing a white screen (and the adds at the side). I doesn't show the login fields. BTW: I would also like to have my bridge system document on it & have it editable. What app(s) you advice for that? (..sorry; new to android) ...googled this: probably it will be ok to be able to read the doc with acrobat reader, documents to go, open office document reader or gdocs & install an editor like Ted to take notes. Thanks, Koen

Smartphone HTC Wilfire S

I have a new HTC with Android 2.3.3 Should BBO run on that? It shows an "!" sign when I try. - I have the browser that was installed on it. I don't know how to get the name of it. It says Internet version 2.3.3 (..maybe that is the name anyway) - I don't know if the browser has an Flash player built in or if I would need an app for that. How can I verify? Thanks, Koen

To clarify my question I changed the hand:Do you still show the C-control? (Note: 3NT showed a singleton, void impossible)

[hv=pc=n&s=s2hkq5432dq32ca32&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp2n(4cH%3B%2010+)p3n(singleton%20S%3B%2012-14)p4d(1st/2nd%20control)p]133|200[/hv] You showed 12-14 en singleton S. Partner shows D-control and denies C-control. what do you bid? => Should South show C-control or minimum hand? (If you don't consider this hand minimum then make it worse with a C-control)