jules101

It's nice that the movie shows diagramme with tricks possible. This is welcome addition. Thank you! Not so good though that it covers/overlaps with club suit in the West hand, so that all 4 hands can't be seen. Could this box be relocated a little? Please!

And do they change their style if BBO tournament is set in IMPS or match points? #AskingForAFriend

Not sure this is very meaningful when the auction presented here is incorrect. 3C* was an enquiry, and alerted, not NAT. And the next two bids listed in your diagramme are also incorrect! This may not make a difference to how people vote in the two polls of course, but if posting a hand where ruling was requested, and then went to AC then please ask your source to give you the correct info! Best wishes from the TD at this event.

Sorry - perhaps I phrased his (mis)claim wrongly. He said he plays Q♦ felling the Jack. And then tabled his last three cards suggesting all were winners. He didn't state in which order he would play this three cards, but implied all were winners. I've edited the original post to make this more clear (I hope!). At this point the claim is contested, so he THEN states he'll play on ♦ and will lose a trump (but he has not idea which trump it is).

[hv=pc=n&s=sqhdcj92&w=sthtdckt&n=sh9dqt9c&e=skj8hdjc]399|300[/hv] North is declarer in 4♥, and currently has 7 tricks. Here is the four card ending. Declarer is on lead, and says... "I'm playing Q♦ which will fell the Jack, and then just tables his last three cards T9♦ and 9♥ (implying all were winners) OK?" Not statement is made about trump (eg no statement such as "I'll just play my ♦ and you can take your winner whenever you like"), so it is clear declarer is not aware there is a trump outstanding. Neither is declarer aware that West is holding the boss trump rather than a small one. Once the claim is contested North says happy to lose a trump trick. TD is called and asked to adjudicate. Assuming West doesn't ruff Q!d, and declarer thinks all his cards are good could TD suggest that he plays 9!h next. This would lose to T!h and when a spade is returned then EW score the last three tricks. Declarer says it would be illogical for his to play the trump first as he can't be forced to play in "careless manner". But given his counting and also his claim were both careless can he also be asked to play in careless manner? Now that he is alerted to the fact that there is a trump outstanding then perhaps it would be logical for him to play 9!h in order to pull the remaining trump if he thinks it might be smaller than his? That way he would still make 11 tricks rather than ten! You - as TD - have to decide how many tricks declarer is entitled to. a) Allowing him to continue playing ♦ until West ruffs. Declarer can regain the lead and win remaining tricks. = 10 tricks. b) Assuming West doesn't ruff Q♦, and declarer is now obliged to play his trump then he loses the final three tricks. = 8 tricks. Which will it be?

This is exactly how I had distinguished the two words/meanings, but Law 41B reads "Declarer or either defender may, at his first turn to play a card, require a review of the auction; this expires when he plays a card." I mistakenly thought that once the opening lead was faced that defenders (and declarer) are merely entitled to "a review" but not entitled to have every call in the auction restated. It seems from what many others are saying this "full restatement of calls" allowed up until they play their first card. After this they are entitled to "review" as you describe above. Clarification from you all is helpful to me, but I feel the wording is tangled and unclear. Is it too late for this to be "tidied up" for 2017 edition of the laws?

English is my first language and yet I interpreted these two words meaning different things. Will there be more clarity/less confusion in the 2017 version?

I had assumed "review" and "restatement" were different. Silly me. Wonder why on earth I thought that.

LAW 41B "Review of Auction and Questions" says "Declarer or either defender may, at his first turn to play a card, require a review of the auction; this expires when he plays a card." (my emphasis) LAW 41C "Opening Lead Faced" says "Following this Clarification Period, the opening lead is faced, the play period begins irrevocably, and dummy’s hand is spread. After it is too late to have previous calls restated (see B), ............... Please could someone clarify for me the exact point the right to have auction RESTATED expires. ("Restatement" being a list all the bids made and by whom). Is this: a) once the opening lead is faced? Or b) may the the partner of the defender on lead request the RESTATING of the auction before he plays a card? (ie after the faced lead is made, and after dummy is tabled). 41B says he is entitled to a REVIEW, but does this include a RESTATEMENT, or merely a general overview of the auction? Many thanks

EW were playing 15-17 NT, 5 card majors better minor, and their auction started thus.... [hv=d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1d2cdp]133|100[/hv] East now bids 2♣ (interesting that software doesn't allow this!) TD was called. South elected not to accept the 2♣ bid. What restrictions are there now on East? If East bids 3♥ or 3♠ presumably West is now silenced, and the auction ends (unless NS bid on). So may East replace his conventional 2♣ bid with a conventional 3♣ multi purpose forcing bid thus allowing West to chose the denomination of the contract?

Ah thanks. I missed earlier discussion. That makes perfect sense.

I was reading Law 45, and I am struggling to understand exactly what 45 C 4 (b) actually means. I've pasted all of Law 45 C below, and highlighted the phrase I'm asking about in BOLD. (I thought that "a played card" was "a played card". But I'm now puzzled!) Explanation welcome, together with a couple of examples.... Many thanks in anticipation! LAW 45 - CARD PLAYED C. Compulsory Play of Card 1. A defender’s card held so that it is possible for his partner to see its face must be played to the current trick (if the defender has already made a legal play to the current trick, see Law 45E). 2. Declarer must play a card from his hand if it is (a) held face up, touching or nearly touching the table; or (b) maintained in such a position as to indicate that it has been played. 3. A card in the dummy must be played if it has been deliberately touched by declarer except for the purpose either of arranging dummy’s cards, or of reaching a card above or below the card or cards touched. 4. (a) A card must be played if a player names or otherwise designates it as the card he proposes to play. (b) Until his partner has played a card a player may change an unintended designation if he does so without pause for thought. If an opponent has, in turn, played a card that was legal before the change in designation, that opponent may withdraw the card so played, return it to his hand, and substitute another (see Laws 47D and 16D1). 5. A penalty card, major or minor, may have to be played (see Law 50).

Thank you all for your thoughts here. The hand which bid 4N is listed here - http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2678/ - x AKxxx ATx QT98. I was interested to hear what others would do when 4S came round to them (but constrained answer by saying X was penalties as per EW agreement at the table). The answer is DOUBLE was favoured (and some of those passing wished to double). PASS achieved a following too. I've listed the "consequence" at the end of the other article.

Partner and I play that a 2♦ opener is weak with both majors - at least 5-4 shape (never 4-4). Our convention card* says the point range is 5-9ish (with caveat that with extra shape we may have fewer values). Fourth board of our evening.... [hv=pc=n&s=sahajt3dakq8ckj98&n=sqj976h98752d7c75&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p2d(weak%20both%20majors)]266|200[/hv] I was expecting partner to have a tad more for his bid when I plonked 6♥ on the table (which made on a misdefense). By the end of the evening (rather than the end of the hand) our oppo described my partner's opening bid as a psyche.... I'm not sure if it is or not (and it evidently wasn't fielded given oppo had chance to score a top on this board). I welcome your views....... (and I think - even before reading comments - that I will tinker with HCP/wording on our convention card). * PS Convention cards seldom used in local bridge club, but I always have available when playing with regular partners. Last night I think we were the only pair out of 13 to have convention cards available! Not that changes my question or our bidding here.

Attended my first Brighton congress this year, and after oppo auctions started 1m - 1M 1N 1!C - 1!D 1N 1!H - 1!S 1N etc ... we asked many opps whether "if your partner (opener) has 4m and 4M and intends to rebid 1N then do they open the major or the minor?" (ie are they major or minor suit based). In nearly every case the oppo said EITHER that they'd never discussed this, OR "it depends..." (it depends what we feel like, it depends on the quality of the suit, and/or it depends whether there is an R in the month presumably). We were somewhat astonished that so many regular partnerships had really not discussed, but .......

What about this sequence in Scotland Paul? It's a commonly used sequence by LOLs in bridge clubs....

[hv=pc=n&e=s93hj9862dkj2ck32&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=4spp4n(Take%20out.%20Usually%202%20places%20to%20play)p]133|200[/hv] A double of 4S opener from partner would be penalties, so 4N is the only take out bid, and often shows two places to play. What's your bid, and why.

Can Ahydra help me find the relevant section in the Rule book. Calling director is good idea, but the cheif and persistent offender is the TD (a club director who directs twice a week). I am, therefore, trying to find a strategy to deal with him. I've suggested on many occasions he's not entitled to ask these questions so why does he keep doing it. Answer "Because it's fun", and then he asks again, and again. We don't divulge info in answer to requests. I suspect, however, everyone else in the room divulges the answers to his questions because if the director is asking then surely he is entitled to ask, etc etc. [Then other players in turn believe they are entitled to ask such questions, and on and on, and on we go!] Strategies are welcome. PS Some might say a pox on all your houses, and and go play elsewhere. That's easy to say, but if playing options are limited one has to try and cope with whatever is on offer I'm afraid. A good idea to speak with club management as PaulG suggests, but bridge clubs here rely on voluntary TDs however flawed they might be. If someone turns up twice a week, week in, week out, then I'm suspecting "management" are not very interested in "rocking the boat".

A frequent occurrence.... Scenario 1 A card is led, and declarer asks: "What does that card show/mean?" We explain our methods - eg "We lead 2nd and 4th, so low from good suit, and 2nd from poor suits". "Yes, but...." says declarer "So what does that card mean she has?" Scenario 2 A card is discarded, and declarer asks: "What does THAT card ask for?" We explain our methods (in detail), and explain to declarer that s/he must interpret the card accordingly. "Yes, but...." says declarer "So what does that card mean she has/whats/etc?" Reply "A low card asks for X, and a high card asks for Y, it's up to you to interpret whether this is high or low, etc etc" "Yes, but ..." says declarer "Is that a high card or a low card?" We explain methods again... and find ourselves in Groundhog day. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable, but it seems to me such persistent questions are designed to get the partner of person on lead/or discarding to interpret the card and thus to "reveal" info about their own hand which is unauthorised to declarer. Questions to forum: Are we correct in to just repeatedly repeat our methods here? Is there a section in Rule Book which deals with this? [i can't locate it]? If not in the Rules then where can one locate guidance about what declarer is/isn't entitled to ask an receive answers too. Seeking advice on handling this situation. Thanks in anticipation.

EW methods are: * 12-14 1N * 4-card majors * multi 2♦ - usually weak 2 in a major (I think we can rule out that East has the other option which is 24-25 balanced!) * 2♥/2♠ - are weak and 2 suited - 5 of the major with 4+ minor - usually 7-10ish. And WJO - generally 6-9ish, but as stated abve if pard has already passed, and they are vuln then (as with 3rd seat openers) then interpretation of weak is "more relaxed". Would normally expect such jumps to be "sound" vulnable opposite passed pard - so upper end of "weak" or could be a bit stronger. Everyone is on a guess. Yes - match points. Original post edited to insert this info.

Match Points [hv=pc=n&e=sqt6532hj753da76c&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp(*%20hesitation)1h(5+%20card%20suit)2s(WJO)]133|200[/hv] NS are playing 15-17 1N with 5-card majrs. EW play weak jump overcalls (but when pard is passed hand and vulnerable then the agreement is the weak jumps should be sound, so likely to be upper end of weak/possibly more). West hesitated before passing, so evidently had something to think about. 2♠ is passed out with NS reserving their rights after West's hesitation. TWO QUESTIONS Q1) Is East constrained from bidding 2♠ after East's hesitation? Q2 How do you do rule? PS You aren't asked to comment on whether East's bid is sensible/kamikaze! You are merely asked to determine whether East may bid here after his partner's hesitation [This post edited to include MP as form of scoring. No other changes.]

Nightmare session last night for you as playing director. This one happened at your table...... [hv=pc=n&w=sq82hkj54d874ckj4&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1n(12-14)2d(spades%20%26%20another%20suit)p2sp3h(STOP%20-%202nd%20suit%20hearts)p4hppp]133|200[/hv] East's used of "STOP" card to make her "non-STOP" bid. Is the use of the STOP card intended to show "extra values or extra distribution"? Or should we give the East LOL (who claims to be a tad confused) the benefit of the doubt here? [There is history here, but not in this session of bridge. Your prior experience suggests the former, but one should of course treat every situation the same way?] After the use of STOP card (suggesting "I have extras") 4♥ seems automatic for West. West should of course should ignore the unauthorised information her partner has transferred during the auction. Does West still have an automatic raise to 4♥ if the STOP card had not been used? You are playing director and these oppos are at your table. How are you going to handle this?

PAIRS [hv=d=n&v=b&b=13&a=p1n(12-14)]133|100[/hv] South now: places STOP card on the table, lifts a bid from bidding box, then sees the 1N opener on his right, and says "Oh - I didn't see your bid...." East has seen the bid pulled, but neither West or North has seen it. East calls DIRECTOR. When you arrive the bid is face down on the table. (You are playing director who hasn't yet played this board :(, so you don't particularly want to ask what the bid was - eg 2M, 3M, 3m etc) East complaining that North now has unauthorised info as a result of South's statement.... What are the options here? OTHER ISSUES 1) 2-level bids over 1N would be conventional for NS. eg 2D would show a single suited major. 2M would be 5M & 4+ minor. 2) Can the "STOP bid" be replaced with "non-STOP conventional bid" here? eg 2D, and then auction would continue as if no irregularity had taken place 3) If South intended to bid "STOP 2M" (and still wishes to bid) is he still required to make a STOP natural bid - eg "STOP 3M"? 4) What constraints are there on North in the auction. 5) What constraints are there on North if he is on lead? [North hasn't seen the bid, but has a singleton Spade, so it doesn't take much effort for North to work out what his partner's suit is!] As playing director you've not played the board yet. You don't particularly want to know whether South pulled a 2-level or 3-level bid out of the box, or whether it was a major or a minor. Can you resolve this without actually seeing the bid?

Similar, but different (in local club) We have one 80+ year old delightful LOL who (whenever holding suit RHO opens) ALWAYS asks if RHO's suit is natural.... eg 1♦ "is that natural?" "Yes" [Pass] etc. Amazingly whenever she asks this question her husband ALWAYS leads this suit. And it generally gets them a god board! [i suppose by inference if she doesn't ask then can have a shot at another suit.] Any tips for managing this?

A standard club tournament. Our dealing machine is away for its annual service, so a small team of us used an "automatic card shuffler" to shuffle all the boards thoroughly. We dealt the boards by hand. It was - or it seemed to me - such an amazing deal that I recorded it after play was finished.