Chris3875

North opens 1NT and partner bids 2H - North reaches over to circle the 2H and gets about a quarter of a circle drawn when South says Uhhhhh NO ! When I was called to the table I said that North must ignore South's comment and continue as though the South bid was a transfer to spades (their system). He bid 2S and South then bid 3H - all passed - and made only 7 tricks. 1. At what point can North legitimately realise that the 2H was not a transfer? (assuming that South has made no comment). 2. Is it logical for North to pull out of the bidding after partner bids 3H - with this sequence (without the mistake) would South be showing a stronger hand forcing to game?

I didn't even consider the unestablished revoke idea - but surely if the small diamond stays on the table as a penalty card, the person then follows suit with his spade and the diamond remains as a penalty card as per normal?

I got lost after the first few lines, but put it down to the 2 glasses of wine I had with dinner.

Cheers Ed, thanks. The other Laws didn't come into play because West bid 4H when the bidding came back to her (and made it - her partner had 22 points). The funniest part about the bidding sequence was when North passed out of turn (accepted by East), East passed and then South tried to pass out (we do double lines at the conclusion of the bidding). When I asked, "aren't you going to give West a turn?", they said "3 passes is the finish of the bidding!!"

Before dealer (East) could make her opening bid, her partner bid 3H which was not accepted by North. I cancelled the bid and the auction reverted to East who was told to pass throughout the auction. While she sat there thinking (about what I'm not sure because her only option was to Pass) North suddenly chimed in with a Pass. I told East that she could accept the pass and the auction would proceed and that she still had to pass throughout - or she could refuse to accept the pass out of turn and that the auction would still be with her, she would still have to pass throughout, and that North would have to pass at his first turn. What a mess - was that correct - and yes, they were all pretty new players !

I was called to the table yesterday when there had been simultaneous faced opening leads from both defenders. I ruled under Law 58 - is that correct? The correct person to lead played the Ace of Spades, her partner a small diamond. I ruled that the Ace of Spades was the correct lead and the diamond a penalty card. After the Ace won, I gave declarer the choice of diamond, no diamond or any lead. Declarer asked me whether he should have been given the choice of accepting the diamond as the opening lead and also whether he could choose to be dummy. I said no.

I looked at the photos Greg posted and I think it says something about the tenacity and dedication of Midland bridge players that they would be out playing bridge after their town suffered an earthquake and a tornado on the same day !!

One of our Directors has had this situation occur twice in the last week - players have said "run the clubs" and then found that the suit did not split as they thought. Her ruling was that they should continue to run the clubs but my understanding is that the player can STOP running the club at any stage - however, I cannot find a Law to support my understanding. I'm sure I have seen it somewhere. Help please.

I have emailed my friend back to make sure she got her Easts and Wests correct - but she is normally pretty exact, so this is the scenario she contacted me about - North is the dealer and Passes WEST bids 1C and North Passes again At this stage neither East nor South have called anything. This seems to me like a bid out of turn that has been accepted by North's second Pass. If North hadn't made the 2nd pass (and didn't accept the 1C bid), am I correct in assuming that the auction would revert to East who must pass throughout?

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sk9763hkqt654dtc7&w=sa2haj32dk5ckj543&e=st54h987dj972caq2&s=sqj8hdaq8643ct986]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] I managed to find the hand the Arlene was talking about - sorry, there were 5 spades and 6 hearts.

With 6 spades, 5 hearts, 1 diamond and 1 club and about 8 HCP, a player asked me yesterday whether she could open 1C. They play Standard American where 1C would show a minimum 11 HCP and no 5 card major or 4 card diamond suit. She said she wanted her partner to respond with his best suit - they have no pre-agreement about this and she didn't actually do it - she was just wondering whether it was against the law to do it. She said she didn't want to open a weak 2 in spades because she had 5 hearts. I don't know whether this was the best decision play-wise (opening 1C with that hand) but I couldn't think of anything in the laws that would prevent it. Any comments?

Reading this thread, I can only be pleased we use written bidding and not bidding boxes ...

Which would have gone off because ops held 10 hearts between them - I thought I was lucky to make 8 tricks. My reasoning with bidding 2NT was to show stoppers in both the bid suits (hearts and spades) and close to opening hand. I see now that a double would have been much better - but I wonder what my partner would have thought I had - minors ? The more I play this game, the more I know I don't know.

Thanks all - I know this site is supposed to be about Laws but that was an interesting discussion about PLAY. Of course in the BBO tournaments (especially the freebies) you don't often to get to play with the same partners so often you are flying by the seat of your pants. I am a fairly low level player, so when my partner doubled the weak 2H bid, I thought - "opening hand, probably a negative double showing spades" - then to my surprise RHO comes in with 2S so I am now thinking "opening hand, probably not hearts or spades - could be minors" and with my opening hand with heart stopper and spades, 3 each of diamonds and clubs all I could think of to do was bid 2NT showing stoppers in both bid suits, which is where my partner left me. I am trying to think what I would bid if the seats were reversed and I had doubled after the 2H bid - then my p doubled the 2S. I think ops would have run to 3H. What a very interesting game bridge is - I know they are legal but I hate psychs.

:) Yes, it was free ! You don't think bidding 2S with 2 small spades, no alert, in a tournament with no psyche bidding is an infraction ?

I guess the first thing is that West has the option of accepting the 4D bid. If he doesn't we need to find out whether the bid was artificial, and if so what the meaning was. If it was a genuine diamond bid (which seems odd when ops are bidding diamonds) then it could be corrected to 5D without penalty.

He was probably very perceptive. This happened on BBO in a tournament - but ignoring that fact, can we apply it to a normal, club game. LHO opened 2H (weak) and partner doubled - RHO bid 2S (no alerts). I had heart stopper, and 5 spades and opening hand so I bid 2NT where we stayed and made 8 tricks. However, partner had 4 spades and an opening hand so we missed our game contract in spades to score a pretty woeful board. RHO had 2 spades. When I whined to the Director he told me I should have doubled. I told him that a double by me at that stage would have been for takeout and shown a shortage in spades. He said I was dumb and that p and I missed out on a cartload of "penalty points" for doubling ops who were vulnerable. I felt that we were damaged - I know we can't do anything about it on BBO - but if this happened in "real life" surely the score would be adjusted?

Our local peer support directors' group have recently been discussing Law 24 - card exposed or led prior to the play period and I think we understand this Law pretty well now. However, as one person mentioned, occasionally you will take your hand from the board, start to count the cards face down on the table and - OOOOPS - there is a card facing the wrong way that suddenly appears face up on your pile of cards. I think most people try to pretend they didn't see it as offender quickly covers it up or snatches it back into hand. In this case it's tough to penalise the player concerned I think - I suppose you could suggest that people count their cards face down UNDER the table to prevent this sort of incident. What would you do if a narky opponent called you to the table saying he had seen a card belonging to LHO? I am guessing you have no other recourse but to apply the Law.

These are just your basic club bridge players. E/W don't open 2NT with that hand because their system is that a 2NT opening or overcall is "unusual". My big hobby horse is that players should give FULL disclosure of their systems and that North should have indicated "partner wants me to speak AND her double could be weak". In this instance I felt that E failed to believe her partner was playing their system when he rebid the 2NT showing 18+ points. My response that I would have let the result stand had I been called to the table didn't go over too well.

[hv=n=shq765dq9632c9853&w=sqt92hatdak8cak72&e=skj6hkdt754cqjt64&s=sa87543hj98432djc]399|300|[/hv] Dealer W Nil Vul. Bidding 1C - P - 2C - X 2NT - 3D - P - 3H All Pass Making 9 tricks This was the subject of after play discussion - I was not the Director on the day (in fact the Director was East). E/W were not happy - when they queried the double they were told "she wants me to speak" - there was no information about whether the hand could be weak or strong. The 2NT rebid by the opener showed 18+ points but East was unsure after the double by South so did not bid on. My thoughts were that North had not given any misinformation (although he could have explained more fully that in their system the double could be as low as 6HCP). East should have trusted partner when he rebid 2NT showing 18+ pts. West does not open 2C with this hand because he has 5 losers (only opens 2C with 4 or less losers). Would you have adjusted the score if called to the table as Director - E/W could make 6NT or 6C. I would have let the result stand.

What UI was given ?

I do totally agree with you David - I just sometimes think a lot of these issues would be avoided if people just SAID everything. For example, at a Congress at the weekend I was called to a table where Declarer said "6" - the only 6 in dummy was the 6 of spades which dummy duly played - but then Declarer said, No, I meant the clubs (there was an 8 of clubs in dummy). Now, on investigation, she DID mean the clubs I am sure, because she had carefully set up the club suit (it was a NT contract) to come back to her hand for 4 winners. By playing the 6 of spades she lost the next 4 tricks. I thought this was a case of declarer's intention being incontrovertible - but the whole fiasco would have been avoided if she said 6 of clubs. Reply would have been, but there is no 6 of clubs - oh sorry, I meant the 8.

I thought EAST might have bid the clubs - not West. The multi-2 two suiter bids are not common in our club - most people would open 2S weak with 6 of suit and not showing any other suit - so I do think it is important that pairs who play this system give a FULL disclosure. As an opponent you may know it is weak, blackshoe may know it is weak, I would know it is weak, but that doesn't mean that all opponents would know it. The opponents knew something was weird when the bid was alerted.

I suppose by "damage" I was thinking that if East knew the bid was weak, she might have been more prepared to bid her clubs (which made). Her double in this case was "negative" showing points and 4 hearts. I cannot understand why West did not bid, whether she thought the 2S was weak or strong - IMO she expected to take the 2S down.

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sk9853ht5dqj954c2&w=saq62hj73d87cjt85&e=st4hq864da2cakq63&s=sj7hak92dkt63c974]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bidding 2S* - X - All Pass 2S alerted and subsequently explained as showing 5+ of spades and another suit. After passing, West asked about the strength of the bid and was told it was weak - 6-10 pts. Director was called and West said she would have bid if she had known it was a weak hand !!!! 2SX made for a good score - I'm not sure it should have made. I did speak to N/S about FULL disclosure - making sure EVERYTHING they know about partner's bid is explained to opponents. Was there misinformation - I think so, yes. Was there damage to E/W - probably, yes. Did they contribute to their own damage - yes! I let the table score stand.