ahydra

MPs, all vul 8xxx 9xx Jx Qxxx You deal, LHO opens 2NT (20-22), opps bid 2NT-3C puppet stayman 3D one 4cM - 4H "natural, 6 hearts" all pass I asked if RHO is 3=6, "probably". Opps are not experienced players. What would you lead? Thanks, ahydra

A 2C opener should normally be captain. I feel 4D (cue) is a better call than 4NT. Whether that gets you to the grand is not clear though - after 4NT-5C (1 or 4) and knowing partner holds CA and DK, South could consider having a stab at it with 6D (third-round ask), but that still doesn't guarantee North has 4=2 in the majors rather than 3=3. And no, I wouldn't be upset with partner. The correct response is "hmm, tricky hand, let's discuss later" :) ahydra

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c1h1sp2sp3d]133|100[/hv] We can't be in a slam auction yet - opener has a minimum and responder has promised no more than perhaps 5 HCPs. To me the 3D is a game try / advance cue bid. Initially opener assumes responder is showing a natural diamond suit (some may play other types of game tries such as showing suits with two losers / a shortage) and trying for game. If the diamond suit does not improve his hand and he has does not have a maximum for 2S, opener just signs off in 3S, otherwise he can bid 4S or perhaps a cue bid if his hand is really good. Responder is unlimited, however, and if he follows up opener's 3S or 4S with another bid, it implies the 3D was actually a cue bid showing 1st or 2nd round control in D and looking for slam. ahydra

Agree - the lead of SK is a hundred times more suspicious than West's continuing the suit! Both a heart and a diamond look like much more obvious alternatives. I wonder how he/she found that. ahydra

1) Certainly nothing wrong with swindling the opponents if you think they would defend the way they did :) Reading your opps is part of the game. 2) I can't recall whether Stayman requires an alert in this position under EBU regs, but if it does, you should have alerted and explained "We haven't discussed, but it could be Stayman". I don't see any alternative to bidding 3NT on the third round - if partner had 6 hearts, he would have bid 4H, so he has at most 5, and clearly no spade fit. 3) I believe the White Book says that a pause at trick 1 should not be considered to convey UI (and quite correctly so). East could equally have been thinking about the hand as a whole. So unless there was some other UI that really suggested a spade continuation, result stands. ahydra

The player should just apologise to the TD like "sorry, there's no problem", and then everyone carries on. No need to explain what he thought the problem was. ahydra

Can recommend this method, assuming you play 5cM: 1m-(o/c)-CUE = support, 10+. New suits either natural or stop-showing, up to you. 1m-(o/c)-2NT = NAT, (10)11-12, stop in their suit. 1M-(o/c)-CUE = 3c support, 10+ 1M-(o/c)-2NT = 4+c support, 10+ jump to 3M mixed, something like 7-9, 4 cards jump to 4M pre-emptive, normally 5 cards ahydra

Partner opens a 12-14 NT in second seat. Both vul at IMPs. You have: KJxx J8xx J6xx A Do you Stayman or pass? (Stayman promises at least one 4cM. You have weak stayman 2C-2D-2H available but it would normally show 4=5 shape) ahydra

Given that RHO has bid, there's no need to bid if you have a pile of rubbish. Also I don't see any need to pre-empt when it is very likely your hand. Hence, all bids are constructive. Double is lead-directional here but if RHO's bid had been natural then advancer's first double is primarily for takeout. With that kind of agreement a simple option would be to play a jump as GF, 5 cards exactly or setting trumps SI, since there's not a lot of room for an invite between constructive (6+ or so) and game-forcing ((9)10+). Partner bids 3NT = no spade support, 4S = spade support MIN, others CUE with spade support & extras - similar to super-old-fashioned Acol 1NT-3M. Not sure if an artificial 2NT or natural 2NT is best. If you held say a flat 7-8 with soft values, a common type, 2NT invitational to 3NT would be very useful. ahydra

I was going to call the TD if it looked like E had used the UI, but she had an obvious raise to 4S with GF values and 4c support. Am I missing something? ahydra

[hv=pc=n&w=sakq6h2dajtcaqt93&e=sj932haq84dk42ck4&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=p1c(2%2B)p1hp2s(NAT%20GF)p]266|200[/hv] Matchpoints. System weak NT, 5cM. The 2S rebid is GF promising either 5+C, 4+S or a huge 4144. Playing natural methods, how can East show a strong-slam-interest spade raise here? Perhaps 3D followed by 4S, but that might be passed? Our intermediate-level opps bid 1C-1H; STOP 1S (the correct way to show a 20-count while preserving bidding space!)-4S; 4NT (simple BW)-5D (one ace); 6S. The grand however is excellent, particularly when the CJ drops in two rounds. ahydra

Yep, perhaps I'm being unrealistic... feel free to tell me as much, but I think it should be possible to reach 6C here? Matchpoints, you're vul, they're not [hv=pc=n&s=sakt843hjdaj65ct6&n=s9haq85dtcaqj9743&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=p1c(2%2B)p1sp]266|200[/hv] System is weak NT with 5cM. Our auction was 1C-1S; 2H-3D*; 4C-4S and I then had to consider that it's matchpoints and 620/650 scores better than 600 (stupid game, MPs), so I passed. At teams I would of course bid 5C and I guess partner might well then raise to 6. Bonus puzzle for I/A: how to play 4S on the lead of D4 (4th, top from rubbish) to the 10 and Q? ahydra

This is partly a style thing I guess. I play a style where you always rebid in NT on the second round with a balanced hand, though that is with a weak NT opener. When playing a strong NT opener, normally with TWalsh, I show unbid majors with a weak NT but still rebid in NT with 18-19 BAL. Given that style, the 2NT/3NT replies to 4SF don't necessarily imply a balanced hand - indeed 5431s might be very common - but otherwise, yes, the key is to continue with a further move, commonly 4NT (quant) over 3NT, when holding a max and partner signs off in game. ahydra

3C first. Passing partner's 3NT reply is probably the percentage action at MPs (unless we can still stop in 4NT should we continue with 4C, where it might be worth telling partner that you do have a SI hand for clubs). ahydra

I think you made an excellent ruling, including in regards to the judgement situation re. South not pausing for long enough. As for the poll question, you can ask something like "You have UI that if partner had bid 5H rather than 5D, South would double for penalty. What do you think that might suggest in relation to your choice of lead?" (Note you should only ask this after the pollee has answered the question on what they would lead, of course.) And I'd expect most answers to be along the lines of "it warns you off a heart lead, but leading hearts is not really an LA anyway", as borne out by the poll post you made. ahydra

1) You should not be drawing partner's attention specifically, but instead drawing the whole table's general attention to the irregularity, and calling the TD (I cannot emphasise that point enough!). Partner will then have the choice to accept the bid. 2) Yes, you can point it out up until your side leads or plays to the next trick, as per L65B3 Certainly this is the case for declarer and defenders; as for dummy, I'm not sure. L65B3 does specifically say "a player" here, not "declarer or either defender" as in other laws; but it could also be argued that pointing out a trick the wrong way is "drawing attention to an irregularity during play" and is therefore prohibited by L43A1b. Personally I've always erred on the side of keeping quiet about this while I'm dummy. edit: Just spotted that L65B3 is referenced from L9A2: I'd say that wording suggests dummy is explicitly excluded from being able to point out incorrectly-turned cards. ahydra

IMPs, NS vul. [hv=pc=n&s=s85h963daq82cq965&n=sak963hqjt84dkca2&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1s2n(minors)]266|200[/hv] System is weak NT with 5cM. East overcalls 2NT showing both minors. Do you double now as South, and if so what do you bid as North over 3m from West? At the table South passed: what should South do on the second round after (3C)-3H-(p)? Thanks, ahydra

IMPs, both vul [hv=pc=n&s=sa2hkqt964da4cq93&n=skj974h5djtcaj654&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1n(12-14)2sp3hp3nppp]266|200[/hv] 1NT = 12-14, 2S = natural (playing Landy). No discussion about how forcing 3H is. The opponents found the obvious diamond lead to sink 3NT, while 4H is fairly easy. Any suggestions for how NS could have done better here? Thanks, ahydra

@pran: in regards to board 3, one pair (EW10) had already played the board. Hence my applying 15B1 rather than 15B2. @blackshoe: From a political point of view, having only directed at this club for a couple months, I don't think I should break with the policy :). And to be honest, I do regard EW to be at direct fault here. Before displaying any hand records or the like, the bridgetab asks EW to confirm the result (and with a PIN number too to be extra-sure it's EW checking and not NS skipping over the check), and it's their duty to check that every detail of the result is correct, including the board number. Hence I think the policy of 40%/40% is actually quite reasonable. I agree with pran when he says From the responses here, it does at least seem that I had ruled correctly in regard to which ArtASs to assign on which boards, which is a relief. :) This was just one highlight of a busy evening, ending with a complex defective trick ruling which I unfortunately did muck up. ahydra

Matchpoints, club game. In one round NS 6 are playing against EW 10. They are meant to play boards 1 and 2, but instead play 1 and 3*. This is only discovered when they enter the result for board 3 (under board 2) and see the results / hand record for board 2 which don't match their hands. Per club policy I awarded 40% to both sides for board 2, as the board could not be played with them having seen the hand record. However, board 3 is where the fun begins. It turns out EW 10 had already played the board in the very first round, against NS 10, and achieved a normal bridge result.** NS 6 had not yet played board 3. NS 6 is easy to deal with - board 3 is scored as 40% to them and 60% to the opponents they would otherwise correctly play board 3 against. But this results in the offending NS getting two 40% boards while the offending EW get only one. Law 15B1 says: This isn't 100% clear - to which "opponents" does the cancellation apply? That is, does it apply to the normal result achieved by EW 10 against NS 10? That would at least make the number of 40% awards equal between the two offending pairs, but an award of 60% might be unduly harsh or generous on NS 10, and it doesn't feel necessary to cancel a result already obtained through normal play. Any thoughts on this? Thanks, ahydra * 2-board rounds; table 6 had feed-in boards which explains why board 3 was there. ** I don't know how they failed to spot this!

Cross-IMPs, NS vul. [hv=pc=n&s=sakj2hajt4d8c9642&n=sqt73h632dajt3c87&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1c(2%2B)2c(natural)dp2hppp]266|200[/hv] NS playing 5cM with a weak NT. How do we locate the spade fit? ahydra

Unfortunately the manual hasn't been updated since 2016. Some of the references to Laws within therefore have the wrong numbers, which has certainly confused me up to now. I'm not sure when it's due for revision, but I hope shortly. In regard to the question about calling the director - I can imagine something like: - NS give misinformation. - EW play a horrible contract of 4H as a result, rather than 5C. - NS revoke during the play. The table agrees their own ruling of one trick transfer. - EW finish down 6, so down 5 after the one trick transfer. - EW however discover later the revoke messed with entries / etc, and the TD would have restored equity and given EW many more tricks, say down only 2 instead of 5. - TD will treat the failure to call him at the time of the revoke a "serious error" (and it is unrelated to the MI infraction), and therefore adjust the score for both sides to 5C=, but deduct from EW the difference in matchpoints between 4H-5 and 4H-2. ahydra

In regards to "serious error", the NZ manual says: Although this is the club's strongest night it doesn't get above I/A level really. I don't think North's play is close to meeting the bar for a serious error. As for 3N, that plays itself when the DQJ drop. ahydra

Matchpoints, none vul [hv=pc=n&s=s65ha5dakt874ckj4&w=sj842h932d953c873&n=sq73hqj84d62caq92&e=sakt9hkt76dqjct65&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1c(polish%20club)d1d(see%20below)2hppp]399|300[/hv] EW play Polish Club: 1C = 12-14 BAL, 15+ clubs, or 18+ any. Result 2H by N -1, N/S -50, lead DQ I was called after dummy was displayed as it had come to light that the 1D bid should have been alerted, showing 0-7 points. It was not alerted during the auction and NS claimed they had arrived in the wrong contract as a result of misinformation. I instructed the table to play out the hand and call me back at the end if they thought there was damage, which they did. I asked South why she had passed 2H on the actual auction and she said that she expected North to have a weak jump overcall type hand in hearts. She had decided her diamonds were not particularly useful opposite such a hand, having supposedly been bid naturally on her left. She was unable to advise whether the meaning of 2H would still be the case over 1D showing 0-7. I judged that South was likely to bid 3D on the second round had she known 1D was not natural, thus showing a good single-suited hand (note that, for whatever reason, it's common for players to play double-then-bid as about 16+ here in NZ) and North would then bid 3NT. However, I also took into account the fact that NS clearly had a misunderstanding over 2H and there was a chance of that occurring, i.e. South still passing, even if 1D had been explained correctly. Applying the usual guideline of being favourable to the NOS in weighted scores, I therefore adjusted the score to: 60% of 3NT by North +2, N/S +460 40% of the table result (N/S -50) which came out to be about 51% for NS. E/W commented they felt not many would bid game on this board, which I felt was surprising, but actually was borne out by the results at other tables with only one other table reaching 3NT+2. Aside from one pair who scored 2200 defending 1NTXX, all others were in minor-suit partscores. Nonetheless, I felt after the given start of (1C)-X and the likely followup of 3D it was almost certain North would bid 3NT. Any comments/suggestions on my ruling? Thanks, ahydra

OP, can you please edit your post to replace the messed-up symbols with the standard BBO ones? [ sp ], [ he ] etc (without spaces). Thanks, ahydra