Rossoneri

Disagree with 2♣, this hand is too weak to open 2♣, it's just misleading for partner.

Well, I would ask the same questions about whether a stop card was used and how long the pause was. Perhaps best to ask South if he/she had thought for a while. Did the TD poll players of similar ability? Bidding 4♥ on your own on a 6 loser hand seems to be crazy without the alleged pause, but others might disagree with me... PS: Good to see the newly qualified TDs not being afraid to ask for opinions!

I chose I might balance, but reading through the comments, the passers have won me over.

I always thought raising the Fourth Suit Force has some other meaning or am I wrong?

Agree with bidding 1NT instead of 2NT.

How good is declarer?

Have you tried looking at the English Bridge Union Website? http://www.ebu.co.uk

Well, South learnt not to lead fourth-highest from the Jack, clearly!

[hv=pc=n&s=sht8754dk987cqj97&w=sakqjt9876hdca642&n=s532hkq3daqt432c3&e=s4haj962dj65ckt85&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1d1h2d6sppp]399|300[/hv] I chose 6♠ at the table, figuring partner and I probably wouldn't have the methods to find 7 anyway if it's there. I made 12 tricks after the K♥ lead. This was a Pairs event scored as Butler IMPs, and for those interested in seeing some results: Click on any name, then look for board 37 Interestingly, is there any play for 13 tricks playing single-dummy?

By all means, this looks logical, but you'll find that people coming from small countries will have 4 to 6 being the same thing.

Am I eligible?

[hv=pc=n&w=sakqjt9876hdcak42&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1d1h2d]133|200[/hv] Your go!

One other point: If South only had 3 hearts, there would only be 11 top tricks instead of 12.

You've already stated the law, and the law is clear, the player in receipt of UI from his partner may not choose the action suggested by UI if there are other logical alternatives. The guidelines to what is a logical alternatives are pretty standard as well. Hence, a certain action taken is either allowed or disallowed. If it is disallowed, why would you be allowing a non-zero probability of it in your final weighing? You can argue how without the UI, the player might have bid on a certain percentage of the time anyway. True, but the law is clear that the action suggested will be disallowed, and why not? It is not that clear how you are going to work out such probabilities and why should you allow the offending side to potentially benefit? But I digress.

This happened in an event with IMP scoring [hv=pc=n&s=s876532hjt9dat96c&w=sj9hakq84dq7ck754&n=skqth65d83cajt832&e=sa4h732dkj542cq96&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=p1dp1h2cdppp]399|300[/hv] 2♣X went 2 off. East informed opponents at the end of the hand that partner had failed to alert his X as a support double. EW have support doubles marked on their convention card. NS called the director and claimed damage - South claimed he would have bid 2S had he known it was a support double. Director was called and she ruled that the table result stands. NS appealed. The appeals committee was told by EW at the appeal that West had simply failed to alert. EW are not a regular partnership but they had a board earlier in the session where support doubles came up (against a different pair of opponents). East also argued that South could have protected himself by enquiring about the double. NS claimed that the double was not alerted hence the assumption that it was for takeout. S claimed that it would be difficult for him to pull to 2♠ without the alert and he would have done so if it had been alerted and explained as being a support double. How would you rule if you were on the AC?

Well done! Enjoy your win!

1. There, the law specifically states it. 2. Frances makes some very good points about falsecarding/count signal not being necessarily true etc. 3. There was really no need to name the players involved, was there?

Congrats!

Off the top of my head, I do think your LHO was allowed to take back his final pass. Edit: Yes, it seems like Law 21 says this is allowed!

We've done this before at university club trainings: We'll pick up our own hand as per normal, and have 30 seconds to look at it, then everyone places their cards face down. We'll then bid with the cards face down, and play by naming a card first and then turning it over. Getting the wrong card involves some sort of a penalty. It is great fun (at least to those of us who are bridge nerds) and it helps in training visualisation.

Congrats to Tomi2 for winning!

Updated again. I've put in 12 provisionally for those who have their pick for winner still in play for the BB/VC.

Indonesian ladies bid it anyway.

More incentive for USA2 to win the BB then I guess? :P Saw you at the Hotel Lobby on Sunday, but sadly I was rushing to catch my flight back and didn't have the time to say hi! Apologies!

Thanks, I'm still in the process of updating as I was away in Veldhoven over the weekend B-)