Chris3875

Well .. this scenario didn't actually happen - I was just wondering what the situation would be if it DID happen ! Let's say that Board 8 had already been played at the other table in a Swiss Teams event - but this table had received a fouled board from the previous table (not their partners) - FAILED TO COUNT THE CARDS prior to commencing play - and with 3 cards to play suddenly discovered the problem - what then ?

I came to the table to find that both North and West had started play with 14 cards - South and East both had only 12. Obviously everyone had failed to count their cards at the start of play ! Rightly or wrongly, I gave them both an Average Minus and sorted out the board. But what would I do if this had been a Team event? (I know what to do if only one side had made an error in a Team event but not both!)

oh yeah - I see what you mean ! Durn - sometimes I am so dumb I amaze even myself.

In Law 64C would there be a non-offending side if both have revoked on the same board ?

I didn't think there was any rectification when both sides have revoked on the same board - Law 64B7

We use written bidding not bidding boxes - is this something particular to bidding boxes. We would certainly NEVER change a written bid without calling the director.

I think I have finally got it !! (as per Eliza Doolittle). If I had a hand with 21 points and RHO had passed, I would open that hand either 2C or 2NT depending on whether it was balanced or not. If RHO opened 1D, I would DOUBLE. In other words, the double is not a legal substitution of an insufficient 1C bid because it does not describe ONLY a hand that is 11-18 HCP - it could be anything from 11 - whatever is left over from RHO's count and therefore does not meet the requirements of Law 27B1b (thanks to Ed Reppert for help with this one). Whew ... another hurdle jumped over.

We don't play better minor, so a diamond would have to be 5 - therefore a 1♣ COULD be 1. I have to say that I've never personally been in this situation (of wanting to replace an IB with a double) but I was asked the question recently and couldn't see any reason why not.

If I had an opening hand I would always open with the major

I want to just labour this point one more time because I really don't understand the subtle differences .... My 1♣ opening can be 11 - 18 HCP - the only other information it gives is that it has no 5-card major. If I had 16-18 HCP and the hand was balanced I would open 1NT. If the opposition open at the 1-level and I then double I am telling my partner EXACTLY the same thing as my 1♣ bid. Why then, can I not double if I make a 1♣ insufficient bid ? I have read Law27B1b a hundred times (don't exaggerate Chris) and it seems (to me) to allow it.

I was in a similar situation recently where I saw something, and one of the players "looked" at me but didn't say anything. I asked a senior director about it later and he told me that I needed to wait until I was called before taking any action.

We play a "short club" - so my 1♣ bid would be saying, opening hand, no 5-card major - wouldn't the double be saying the same thing ?

If the opposition open 1♦ and I have an opening hand but no 5-card suit, I can double to give that information to my partner. If the opposition open 1♦ and I am asleep at the wheel and bid 1♣ (insufficient bid which is not accepted by LHO), can I then replace it with a double? Law 27B1b "If, except as in (a), the insufficient bid is corrected with a legal call that in the Director's opinion has the same meaning as, or more precise meaning than, the insufficient bid (such meanings being fully contained within the possible meanings of the insufficient bid) the auction proceeds without further rectification"

The N/S actual agreement is that 4C opening is Gerber asking for aces - it could be a strong hand looking for slam or it could be a weak pre-emptive hand with a long suit. Opener knows which suit s/he wants to play the contract in, but is unsure of the level. They are the only pair in our club that plays this system - and I think it must be a new addition because I have never seen it before. It's a bit like a multi 2D opening that COULD be a weak bid in hearts or spades or COULD be a strong balanced 20-21 pt hand. I agree that E probably should have doubled the 4C bid - if only to show a lead direction - but after s/he didn't and the bidding went 4H - P - P a double by E now would surely be for penalty (in her partner's mind) - I don't think as her partner I would have bid on. I watched this board being played by the next 6 tables and noticed that 4 of the 6 North players opened 4H straight away - I think E would have acted over that bid knowing that it was weak - a double would have had her partner bidding either spades or clubs and they would have found their contract. This is why I think they were damaged. I find this area of directing really difficult - I haven't been playing long myself and got pushed into this role because no-one else wanted it - I've been working as a caddy/director with 3 of the top TD's here (you would probably know them David - Martin Willcox, Laurie Kelso and Sean Mullamphy) but when I see the different responses from experienced directors here I wonder whether I will ever learn. I've been reading all the posts and can see merit in them all - how to make that final decision is the big question for me.

What would you tell South about changing his bid before the TD is called?

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=s642hkqt97543dt6c&w=skjth6d975cqj9864&e=saq75hadqj83cak32&s=s983hj82dak42ct75]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] North opened the bidding 4C, East asked what the bid meant and South said it was Gerber asking for aces. South didn't mention that their agreement was also that it could be a weak hand with a long suit. East passed, South bid 4H showing 1 ace and all passed. North didn't add any explanation before the opening lead. After the hand was played (4H going one off) E/W called me to the table as they felt they had been disadvantaged by the "misinformation". After polling 3 other senior players I agreed that they had been damaged and adjusted the score to 5C making by E/W. This is an area of directing that I have the most trouble with (probably because I am not much of a player) - I would appreciate your comments please.

:) How could ANYONE not know where Bairnsdale is .... geez. East coast, Victoria ... approximately 300 klms from Melbourne. In other words, out in the "sticks" and a long way from any help with directing issues - so this website is fantastic. We have our own website in Australia but answers take a loooooong time. David, I saw a few of your responses on the Australian website which is how I bumbled my way here.

ok - I'm sort of happy about that - although I can't help feeling that he THOUGHT he had redoubled. B)

sooooooo ..... should I have taken the offender away from the table to ask him what the heck is double meant ?

I can't agree with that ruling Tyler - Law36B says "when LHO does not call before rectification ... the offender must substitute a legal call, the auction continues, and the offender's partner must pass whenever it is his turn to call. The lead restrictions of Law 26 may apply".

There were no subsequent calls - I think Law 36B applies. My question is, should I have taken the player away to ask him what he meant by the double as I think NOW that it might have just been a mechanical problem - that he meant to redouble but didn't realise he needed to write XX (we use written bidding).

The bidding went 2S (weak) - Double - Double - director called. I ruled illegal double, offender then passed and ops ended up in a 3H contract. There were lead restrictions (lead or ban any suit) - but now I am wondering whether I should have taken the offender away from the table and asked him what he MEANT by the bid (I suspect it might have been a redouble). It was a red point championship pairs event.

Thanks everyone - I am from Australia and I was talking about Club events both Swiss Teams and Round Robin Teams. I think Law 5 covers the situation very well.

Is there a Law or Regulation covering the format of teams? For example can a N/S pair change to E/W when playing Team number 2, then swap back to N/S when they have to play Team number 3. Sometimes players think they will do better playing against a certain combination in another team. What if the N/S players in Team 1 want to play against the E/W players in Team 2, but Team 2 want to swap their players - if they are allowed to swap, which Team takes precedence?

ABF Alerting Regulations state - Do not alert any single suited overcalls showing only the suit named, whether weak, strong or intermediate.