jules101

[hv=d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p4sp(What%27s%20this%20then...%20etc%20etc)p]133|100[/hv] East says - at their turn to bid in a somewhat jocular tone - "What's this then...? Bid game, and try and make it...?" Is West now compromised?

Yes - you correct. Typo from me - post above edited. After 1N - 2C 2M - 3OM .... what does opener do with grotty min? Are they obliged to cooperate? etc etc etc

After 1N 2♣ 2M 3OM showing slam interest in pard's major... .... is 1N opener obliged to cooperate? .... or may they sign off with grotty minimum? [sorry - initial typo - put in 2OM in error! Duh]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj876hjt95d2cqj52&w=s3h62dkqt7654ca43&n=sakt95haq8daj83c6&e=sq42hk743d9ckt987]399|300[/hv] NS make 4♠ N/S make 3/2♥ NS make 2N

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt95haq8daj83c6&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=pp3d]133|200[/hv] This hand came up in a teams match. Do you risk a double and hope to bid ♠, to show a strong flexible hand? The worry is that pard bids ♣! Over to you!

So what is consensus on North's action over 5C? N S 1N - 2C 2D - 3N 4S - 5C ?? May North pass on basis they "know" (from prior experience) or "suspect" wheels have come off. 3N is a limit bid after all! Or are they obliged to bid on as if 5C is cue agreeing Spades, and slam interest. I'm unclear if we are ruling that 5C may be the final contract?

[hv=pc=n&s=sah986d874cakt975&n=skjt9hqt74dkqtcj6&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1n(12-14)p2c(Non-promissory%20Stayman)p2hp3n(Partnership%20agreement%20is%20that%20this%20seq%20shows%204%20card%20S)p4s(As%20per%20partnership%20agreement)p5c(Panic)ppp]266|200[/hv] You are called to the table at the end of the auction, and again at the end of the hand. The partnership play 2C non promissory Stayman. This is the method the partnership uses to make an invitational raise to 2N (even if they have no 4-card major) as 2N would be a transfer to diamonds. The partnership agreement is that 1N - 2C - 2H - 3N will show game values AND 4-card S suit. With game values and NO 4-card major responder would just raise 1N to 3N. North converted 3N to 4S as per agreement. South now has a moment of panic, and bids 5C. Everyone passes and you are called to the table, to review the auction, and again at the end of the hand. South explains she'd forgotten the sequence to 3N showed 4-card S suit. She had decided to bid 2C en route to 3N "because I wanted to find out if my partner had got something in the majors". 4S does not look like a successful spot to South, and so she bid 5C over 4S. 3N makes, 5C is minus one, but 4S is worse spot! NS got a bad score on the board. Do you rule the result stands, or do you rule back to 4S minus more than one? Or something else?

South is declarer. Trick 5 East leads a low C, declarer plays the Jack, West plays the ten, and a low club is played from dummy (North). Declarer's Jack has won the trick, but both defenders, and declarer all turn over their cards and arrange these as if EW (defenders) have won the trick. Dummy realises this is incorrect, and leaves her card face up, but doesn't speak immediately. West (who played the ten under declarer's Jack) now leads KC to the start of trick 6. Dummy's card from trick 5 is, however, still face up. Law 65 (Arrangement of Tricks) gives dummy the right "draw attention" to a card being pointed in the wrong direction, but this right expires when a lead is made to a subsequent trick. Questions: When does trick 5 end, and when does trick 6 start? So which trick are we on? May dummy now speak at this point, or has she "lost her right to speak"? Is KC now a major penalty card, or may West return this to his hand?

Do all jurisdictions allow well completed WBF forms? I seem to remember some discussion that EBU didn't accept these at Brighton, so badly partially completed hand written scrawls are preferable?

How can it be the end of the auction? The 3D bidder has another bid (if they wish!)

Hello I've heard about "Cafe Bridge" in Antwerp, and that it's been replicated in London. Can anyone tell me more, or point me to where we can find more info? Cheers

1N [3♦] X [P] pick up... May any of the other three players point out the auction is not complete at this point as there haven't been three passes? Or is the only person who may point this out the one who is next to bid (ie the 3♦ bidder)? So if the doubler, or partner of the 3♦ bidder, speak up at this point they would now they would now be speaking out of turn, when not their turn to bid?

If you ask expecting it to be artificial (so you can double to show that suit) and it is artificial all is fine. You double! If unexpectedly the bid in the sequence does turn out to be natural, you ask and now you pass, then isn't it rather obvious you have a fistful of that suit? Then there is an ethics problem? You are sometimes left wishing you could ask when a bid isn't alerted. Maybe it IS natural, in which case you would pass in tempo. You don't wish to be unethical if the bid is natural, so you pass, but then the next hand completes the transfer and you have lost your opportunity to double. Maybe one can call the director once the transfer is completed (after no alert/announcement) and you can ask to replace your pass with a double? Is that allowed?

Very club players in club tournaments have such a card. I know they should, but they don't. For many this is a social night out, and us pedants are taking it all a wee bit too seriously. If you are lucky though they may have a few scrawls on the front of their score card. It's generally seen to be "bad form" to be asking for such a card when they evidently don't have one, and as for calling the director.....! They came out for a pleasant evening, and now you are spoiling it. ... but OK thanks for the advice, that's what I'll do in future. Perhaps it will encourage players to be more fastidious about alerting (or announcing) and/or maybe even filling out a convention card! Did I just see a pig flying past my window? :(

Similar, but related question (perhaps I should have started a new thread) [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1np2d]133|100[/hv] You "know" either from previous experience or from convention card (if you can find one) that opps play transfers over 1N. North doesn't, however, alert (or announce - delete as appropriate for your regulations) the 2♦ bid as a transfer. You are next to bid and wish to double the transfer bid. What do you do next? Do you query the bid and then double after it is confirmed this is a transfer? Do you pass, and seethe when they play in 2♥ and it turns out your side could have made 3♦? Do you double anyway? This situation (non alerting/announcing of transfers) happens more often than it should, and I never know how best to handle it. Advice welcome. I'm always worried with option 1 is that maybe the opps aren't playing transfers (there is no convention card, no announcement, and maybe you have misremembered what they played before, or maybe they've stopped playing transfers) and then 2♦ turns out to be natural after all then asking and not bidding is bad because it implies you have Diamonds too. You are potentially in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation if you ask/don't ask. How would you recommend such situations should be handled?

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1hp2n3s]133|100[/hv] Opps come in over your pard's GF J2N. What methods do you use as declarer to describe your hand?

Law 73 – COMMUNICATION D – Variations in Tempo or Manner E – Deception Do these apply equally to declarer as well as to defenders? Obviously declarer can't mislead or communicate messages to dummy, but could their tempo (deliberately or unintentionally) deceive opponents? For example: declarer holds a singleton A (in suit one opponent has bid), when the suit is led she hesitates prior to playing the singleton A, is she (declarer) then in danger of misleading opps by her hesitation/variation in tempo? Declarer may well be planning her next move rather than intending to deceive. It is possible, however, that the defender could be fooled into trying to cash a "winner" before cashing other tricks, thus handing control back to declarer.

[hv=pc=n&w=sajt95h63dq75cj76&e=s74hkq875dak4caq8&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1cd1hp2hp2sp2np3sp3n]266|200[/hv] EW are playing some strong ♣ system. X showed majors (no doubles are alerted in SCOTLAND), and neither E or W asked the meaning of X at any point. NS advise that they usually play transfers after 1♣ opener. After the double West thought transfers were still on, while East thought that 1♥ would be natural. West was alerted to his partner's misinterpretation given (i) 1♥ wasn't alerted as transfer, and (ii) East raised ♥. [Maybe this could have been a transfer break, but this wasn't asked of EW at the table.] All passed after 3N. NS queried the auction prior to the lead and were told West was now showing 6 card ♠, and that he probably didn't have ♥ now after all. West said 1♥ was meant to be transfer. East said he thought 1♥ was natural after the double, but as his partner had now shown ♠ twice then he must have 6♠, and not ♥ and had been correcting earlier bidding confusion. What does auction show given that East initially considered his partner to have ♥. East/West did not have a convention card between them so it was impossible to know whether transfers should have been on or off after the double. WHAT SHOULD THE CONTRACT BE AFTER THIS AUCTION? Should East be bidding 4♥ here? OR should auction be corrected to 4♥? OR may EW play in 3N? OR what?

I was looking for the wording "visible to all" but this doesn't appear in this rule. What about when: declarer calls for card from dummy; his RHO plays a card; declarer holds his card horizontal, face up, approx 4 inches above table (visible to all players and dummy), but then realises his card doesn't beat LHOs. [For info the next hand to play has already shown out on the previous round, and the contract is NT, so it doesn't matter what they play!] declarer retracts his (non winning) card and plays a higher card. Was declarer's first card played or not? Does it make any difference if both defenders (and dummy) could see the card?

MP pairs, love all [hv=pc=n&s=sj5haq632dq985cq5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp2hp3hp]133|200[/hv] Pass or 4H? 2H promises 10+ hcp, and 5+ card H suit

Law 45C2 – Compulsory Play of Card 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. Could more experienced directors elaborate on [a] and .

Paul was correct in clarifying that over 3N we don't alert in Scotland (unless in first round of bidding). ..... the "new alerting regulations" came in a few years ago, but many club players regularly alert many things that shouldn't be alerted, eg their partner's weak 2 openers, Gerber bids (in suit contracts) and responses, etc. I used to point it out such infractions, but as you can imagine it doesn't make you popular, so I don't bother any more. [Maybe it's "not my place" to comment anyway.] Last week I did, however, suggest to someone that self-alerting her own Gerber bid at the bridge table which was accompanied by a "Oh, I can't remember if I should alert that, or not?" was highly inappropriate!] Anyway - back to discussion of my post. My impression was that responder's alert of 4♥ was on auto pilot (as per old procedures), and was not intended to send any message to his partner. [i wasn't meaning to imply this auction/alert was dodgy, and hope noone thought that. Sometimes it might be, but I think not on this occasion.] Responder had a control rich 16 count with a good 5 card ♥ suit. He knew the wheels had come off somewhere. 6N is a reasonable bid opposite partner's 15-16/15-17 1N rebid. They can - and did - make all 13 tricks. We were not disadvantaged. As I said earlier, I was merely using this auction as a case study. I wanted to be clear about a principle here so I know for the future.

Thanks all. I realise I can't ask declarer what cards are in his hand, but thought I could ask about his interpretation of his partner's bid. If we know he's interpreted it in a particular way, then we as defenders may draw some inference about the 4♥ might be. If I understand correctly replies to the post correctly then I am entitled to know their agreements, but not how opener interpreted the bid. What is the situation when agreements have been forgotten?! It seems they had recently agreed that 4♣ would be ace asking over 1N and 2N rebids. Given the first bid in the auction was 1♣ opener thought 4♣ chose to believe it must be natural. [He also said later that he'd forgotten the recent agreement, so we'll never know which was really the case.] It really made no difference on this particular hand. No damage was done. It was the principle I was try to establish for future reference. PS to Nigel - we didn't ask any questions during the auction period. We know better!

Auction starts (with silent opps) 1♣ 1♥ 1N* 4♣** 4♥*** 6N Pass 1♣ = natural, 4+ cards 1N rebid = 15-17ish 4♣ = was intended by responder as some sort of ace asking bid rather than natural, or....? 4♥ = this was alerted (in error one assumes) by responder, thus rather highlighting that 4♣ wasn't intended as natural! Partner asked about the auction before leading. 4♥ was interpreted as 2 Aces, but when dummy was tabled he had 3 aces! When it was my turn to play at Trick 1 I asked declarer "how he had interpreted the 4♣ bid". That would help us as defenders sort out what 4♥ was. ie - natural, a cue bid accepting slam interest in ♣, etc. He said he wasn't sure I was allowed to know the answer to this question. He said I might be but her wasn't sure. [Declarer is a National Director, and more qualified than anyone else in the room so we left it at that.] Am I entitled to know the answer to questions such as these when "wires have become crossed in the auction? And - would I then be entitled to ask declarer of the meaning of 4♥ - eg was in a cue, was it delayed support for ♥, etc? It made no difference here, but on other circumstances one partner may cue bid 4♣ and the other may interpret as Ace asking and reply accordingly. If this hand goes on to be declarer are we entitled to know the question that declarer thought he was being asked (even if he wasn't!)? Sorry this sounds very convoluted. Cheers!

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=skj75h7532dq53ca8]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] W N E S 1♠ X 2♠ ? Double promises a shapely hand (if minimum) so should have 4 card ♥ suit (or 3 good ♥, eg AKT). 2♠ will be non-constructive. What's your bid, and why?