badderzboy

Hi Jillybean, The opponents were decent players with some success in regional competitions and to be honest was amazed they fell for it. I'll give you the west hand later :) Steve

You're playing in a local competition and the following happens... Partner opens a weak 2♠s and you hold [hv=d=n&v=n&s=sqxxhjxxxdxxcjxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] RHO passes.... Always competing to 3♠s you decide to bid 2NT as Ogust to get partner to describe their hand and to 'put' off opps who surely have game between them... LHO enquires what is 2NT and is told 'it is purely a relay to enquire about my hand and asks for more information'. LHO passes after 10-15 secs and Partner bids 3♠s then 3 passes. Everyone is a tad surprised at dummy and East/West get a little upset but nevermind that bit. I'm sure this type of bidding was suggested in a book or article as a tactical bid but I can't remember where. (i) Do you agree with the bidding? (ii) Is it a pysche? (iii) Can anyone remember reading the same suggestion in a text book? Cheers Steve

3♣ for me

Thanks all for the comments. I was pretty certain I had to bid as though partner had understood my bid and so had to double 5Hs and also not speak as defender until the hand was complete. I did immediately call the TD over and explained that in my honest opinion that there was MI and that I believed that the opponents had been damaged. The TD agreed and we adjusted the score and turned a clear top into a bottom c'est la vie. I was interested in people's views and I'm glad I was right to act as I did in the bidding/play and then speak up in line with the laws. What amazed me was the opps were surprised that someone would be so honest! Steve

Yes was explained as a Jacoby type raise

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=skxxhjxxxdakq10xxc&s=saqxxhakqxdxxcaxx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] We bid it 1♦-1♥-4♣(splinter)-4NT-5♦-5NT-6♦-7♥ but 7NT also has great chances do you settle for 7H or go for broke as not every pair can detect that partner has the right King? Steve

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sxxhk10xxdkxxcqxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] The Scene You're playing club pairs and a qualified TD and playing at a table with 3 players not so versed in the laws of the game... The action Pass - pass - Your partner opens 1♠ and RHO bids 2♥s and you decide to bid 2NT and partner alerts and thinks it's Jacoby 2NT LHO bids 3♥s, ptr 4♠s and RHO 5♥s which you double and it's -2 for 300 and a top. How do you handle the bidding as the auction continues? Is the Double assuming you ignore all the MI/UI? What do you do - LHO/RHO will let the result stand as they know no better - Do you? Steve

I think that if you accept your argument you will never find a case where you fail to adjust after misinformation, and a bad result. I wonder how many people on this thread have gone thru any director training. The laws are there to protect everyone especially the NON - offending side. In the quote above it is N/Ss responsibility to alert THEIR bids to their opponents so they created the MI not EW so guess what they are likely to pay the price. I would even bet that Jilly may have even alerted the DBL as other two suits. So any benefit of the doubt goes to the non-offending side EW. So we need to consider an adjusted score for both pairs.

In my humble opinion, I feel EW are getting short-changed as ANY alert in the opening auction would at least stop the final contract becoming reality. Did EW act so poorly that we assume they failed to play bridge so they lose the right to an adjustment ... I guess it was a pickup and East misunderstood the 2S bid by West then I would not rule against them as they are the non-offending side. I would likely adjust to 2D+3 or 4 - I haven't looked in great detail at the hand and East would never double the opening sequence showing the majors given the correct information so they was clearly damage by the failure to alert. The best advice Jilly is to post on www.bridgetalk.com as you will get replies by some very experienced directors incl David Stevenson EBU and Francis Hinden and Jeffrey Allerton who will comment with a directors hat on. Cheers Steve

Another point to this example is the director doesn't need to take responsibility to deciding if NS would reopen but ask peers for their judgement holding the South hand and you hear the auction 1♣-p-3♣(weak)-p-p do you pass or bid and if so what. If peers make dbl a logical bid then it is fair to judge damage NS and adjust assuming that EW are playing inverted minors as the hand does sort of suggest. In the UK you may well get a split ruling but this doesn't apply in ACBL.

A5 J8642 AQ7 1072 Q64 AK K964 AQ53 So on the Spade Lead we have 8 tricks on top.... 9th Can come from in ♥s 3-3 or Qx or 109 or Hand with 4♥s holding K♣s as we can promote 5th Heart ♦s 3-3 ♣ finesse right 50% chance. I'm going for AK♥s first and then cross to ♦ and concede ♥ and go from there and eagerly await being told how silly my line is B) Steve

[hv=d=w&v=e&w=sahat95dkqt42ca43&e=skj532hj8762d83c9]266|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Bidding West opens 1♦, North Doubles, East bids 1♠ (agreement is ignore double existed so forcing), South bids 2♣s and West 2♦ all pass. 4♥s is cold, who should bid 2♥ so who's to blame? Steve

1st Ruling Relevant Laws are :- Law 46b2 2. Designates Suit but Not Rank If declarer designates a suit but not a rank, he is deemed to have called the lowest card of the suit indicated. Law 45D Card Misplayed by Dummy If dummy places in the played position a card that declarer did not name, the card must be withdrawn if attention is drawn to it before each side has played to the next trick, and a defender may withdraw (without penalty) a card played after the error but before attention was drawn to it; if declarer’s RHO changes his play, declarer may withdraw a card he had subsequently played to that trick (see Law 16C2). So as long as Director is happy that this was the case and the testimony suggests it then we correct the trick and continue. 2nd Ruling :- Laws 69,70 & 71 apply and simply the claim statement is restated and then the director asks why the claim is disputed - we then apply if “normal” play which includes play that would be careless or inferior for the class of player involved, but not irrational could cost declarer any tricks. Steve

Hand 1 Bidding to date - you open 1♠ and partner bids 2♥ then RHO doubles (showing the minors) What do you do holding? [hv=d=s&v=n&s=sqj8643hdq54cakq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Hand 2 Bidding to date Pass - Pass - Pass - 1♦ by ptr - 3♥s by RHO (who did pass originally) What do you bid holding? [hv=d=s&v=n&s=sqj8643hdq54cakq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Hand 3 (Playing a Weak NT so 1NT rebid shows 15-16). Bidding so far (no opps bidding) 1♦-1♠-1NT(15/16) What do you bid holding? [hv=d=s&v=n&s=sqj8643hdq54cakq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Thanks for the input! Steve

3NT should be natural as East has asked which Minor and 'should' have ♣s stopped for their bid. I wouldn't bid 4♦s as I have fully described my hand so its up to partner. I don't want to be in 6♥s relying on catching a stiff K♦s but I must admit I don't understand why East furtled with 3NT rather than a simple 4♥s... Steve