Chris3875

I would have doubled also, but then we would have probably ended up in 4C for a score of 130 against the 3D going off 3 for 150. Stupid game.

Pran, I was replying to two different posts at once. I knew what I meant ! mgoetze suggested West could bid 2NT over the 2H bid. mgoetze - yes, I knew you were talking about E/W - I was just trying to look for any possible action that I didn't think of at the time that would support my decision NOW :D Just when I think I'm turning into a reasonably credible director, I fall on my face.

It was a pretty weak 2H opening with 5HCP - however, I guess it had only 8 losers.

Yes, well I did sort of understand that ...... but bluejak hasn't been wound up for a while.

West did say she would have called over the 3D bid given the correct information - but I foolishly didn't ask her what she would have called. :blink: I don't think she could have bid 2NT because in their system that means 5+ of both minors and she needed to have 5 spades to bid 2S. She was really caught between a rock and a hard place - I don't know that any other South's in the room opened 2H.

No - unless there has been an irregularity and only upon instruction of the Director Law 41A

I ruled under Law 75B that E/W were given a mistaken explanation of the 2S bid when the system agreement was for it to be "pass or correct" or basically show me your other suit if it's not spades. "East/West are entitled to an accurate description of the North/South agreement (when this infraction results in damage to East/West, the Director shall award an adjusted score). I did discuss it with 3 other senior players and they agreed on the damage. I noted (and bluejak will go spare when he reads this) that almost every other pair in the room had bid either 4S or 3NT (making between 9 and 11 tricks. I did see that even given a correct explanation of the 2S bid that South would still have bid 3D as it was her other suit. I was generally uneasy about my decision which comes back to my shortcomings as a player.

N/S were definitely not bunnies, but I did suspect them of doing some "bunny bashing".

West felt she couldn't double after the 2H bid because in their system that shows at least an opening hand and a shortage in the bid suit - support for all other suits. By the time the auction came back to her at 3D she basically didn't know what to do. I was the director and felt that Under Law 75B I should be awarding an adjusted score. I did speak to other senior players in the room and eventually adjusted the score to 3NT by E/W but I was not really happy with that decision. Blackshoe was correct - South believed that she should show the other suit and that North could sign off in 3H or bid on if her hand was strong.

[hv=pc=n&s=s53ha9872dj7654c2&w=sakt9hkj654d3ca73&n=s7642htdk982ckj65&e=sqj8hq3daqtcqt984&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=2hp2sp3dppp]399|300[/hv] Australia - Teams event. N/S were "advanced" players - E/W "intermediate". The 2H bid was alerted and explained as showing 5 hearts and 5 of another suit. The 2S was alerted and explained as showing spades and support for hearts. After the auction was completed North called the director and said that her partner had given a wrong explanation of the 2S bid and that it was, in fact, a "pass or correct" bid which was on their system card. 3D made 6 tricks. I felt that E/W were damaged as they could have made 3H, 4C or game in spades or NT.

Thanks Gordon!

West did have a singleton heart. Her cards were xxxx spades, x hearts, Axxx diamonds and Jxxx clubs. Unknown to her, her partner had opened 2S with 4 spades and 20HCP. North had 10HCP and 7 hearts AJT9853.

I'd be interested in having a full explanation of the law relating to "hesitation" in the following scenario as neither the players involved or the director of the day were sure - as I was involved as the North player it was difficult for me. I don't have the actual hands. North opened a weak 2H and East sat for a very long time before finally bidding 2S (he had 20 points and 4 spades and probably would have been better off doubling). South passed, West passed, and North then bid 3H. East again hesitated for some time before passing. South passed and West bid 3S. West had 4 small spades and about 4 points. North called the director who at first said that the 3S bid should be cancelled! We played the contract in 3S and it made 11 tricks (-200 for N/S). I felt the contract should be taken back to 3H going off 1 (-50 for N/S).

I'm not quite sure what difference it makes whether you knew you were going to be the unpaid playing director a week before the event or found out just before play commences as far as deciding what result you give yourself when you are unable to play a board. I am the unpaid playing director at our club every week and I think it would be a bit tough on my partner to have to wear an A or A- whenever we cannot play a board for reasons related to my directing duties. He is no more at fault than the opponents and I, quite honestly, cannot see that I am at fault either for doing my (unpaid) job.

The "bums on seats" voting at our club is, I think, the proof of the pudding. At a neighbouring club players complain constantly about never knowing what time they will get home and about having to sit and wait every round for the slow players. The pairs following slow players are constantly having to play "catch up" and don't like it. Please don't get the impression that we are taking boards off players on a regular basis - in fact, these days, it rarely happens because players are aware of the local rule. It is difficult for playing Directors to be on the floor hurrying players along. I am comfortable with our local rule but I have written to our Chief Director to get an opinion from him on whether it is "illegal".

We usually allow part of one session during our Beginners' classes for a Director to come and speak but it is more to acquaint them with the role of the Director (not the big bad bogy person there to hit you over the head with a stick if you make a mistake). One of our State Directors does run a session for club players - the aim being for them to understand how the Laws can work in their favour at the table e.g. when they are given choices for lead out of turn, etc.

I don't know about Law8B - it does go on to say ..... or the Director has cancelled the play of the board.

I am very sympathetic with swanway's situation - there is certainly plenty of time allocated at his/her club to allow boards to be played. We also brought in a local rule at our club that if the opening lead had not been made (ie. they were still bidding the hand) when the 3 minute warning bell rang, then the board was to be handed in and the director applies the appropriate penalty. Players are aware of this rule and it is enforced without fear or favour - there is no late play. Maybe it sounds tough, but we have players who travel long distances to play at our club (a large number 80+ kilometres round trip and some up to 200 kilometres) so it is important for them to know that the session will finish between 4.00-4.15pm. Even an extra 2 minutes per round to cater for the players who prefer to discuss how the previous hand should have been bid or played rather than get on with the job can add an extra 20 minutes to the session. This local rule was moved at our annual meeting a few years ago and was accepted by a big majority of the players - slow play had been a problem and continues to be so at another local club who allow play to continue if the cards have been removed from the board. Assuming that we allow 7 minutes for a board to be bid and played, if you let play continue after the cards have been removed, that table could hold up play for an extra 4 minutes - pretty frustrating for players that are adhering to time. Attendance at our club has not been affected since this rule was brought in - on the contrary, our table numbers have risen.

I am feeling a bit shellshocked after playing in an event today. 1. I am North and West openes a weak 2H. Pass by me, Pass by his partner, Pass by my partner. Then North holds his head in his hands and says "Oh no" !!! Director called - she looks at his hand and says you can change your bid to 2S !!!! I say, "but his partner has called" (I should have shut up) and Director says "OK, you will have to wear it then". Declarer makes 1 trick (yes ONE) - my partner has all the hearts. A bad result for us - we make 350 and should make 11 tricks in hearts. No rectification for us. 2. At the next table West opens 1C - East says 2S - West 3S - East 4C (Gerber asking for Aces) - pass by West. Director called and West says "I thought my partner bid 4S so I passed". Director allows West to answer the Ace ask !! and eventually East bids 6 HEARTS - changed to 6S by West. I ask West to explain the auction, in particular the 6H bid. She doesn't know. Director is called again who looks at East's hand and says "it's OK, play on". What do you say when you are a director playing at club level and you believe a mistake has been made. It is so difficult to get directors that you don't want to tee them off. You don't really want to get involved in appeals at this level either.

Australia. Today I was asked about this situation which occurred yesterday when I was neither playing nor directing. I don't know the hands but I don't think it matters. Declarer (North) led the Jack of spades and before East could play a card dummy pushed forward the singleton spade in dummy and West played a small spade. My thoughts would be that the card was misplayed by dummy (Law 45D) and West should have beeen given the opportunity to retract her card and East is given the opportunity play. But Law 45D doesn't quite cover this situation in my opinion. What is the correct ruling and Law please.

Deleted

I agree with your comment about the damage (or lack, thereof).... I know at our table (it was a simultaneous event and we played the same boards Australia-wide) the bidding was simple - 1NT - 4C 4S - 5C 5H - 7NT and a claim was made after the opening lead. Amongst other things the Director is concerned about this bidding "style" at club level where there are some very inexperienced players, but I'm not sure we can (or should) be intefering with players' conventions - as long as they make a full disclosure.

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt53hj62d8632ct2&w=sa74hkq93daqt5cqj&n=sq982h8754dc86543&e=sk6hatdkj974cak97&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1n3d4cp4sp5cp5hp6nppp]399|300[/hv] 3♦was alerted. East asked about it and was told that a jump bid shows a void in the bid suit. East asked about the points and was told "he will have some points" ! 4♣ and 5♣ were both Gerber. The director at this club is unhappy about this convention even though the bid was alerted and it is on their convention card. When she asked me I felt that they should be also saying that the bid can be made with as few as 2 points, but apart from that I cannot see any reason to take any further action. To me it seems a pretty stupid sort of bid. Any comments?

Australia