Chris3875

So... if you've got three winners in dummy but no way of getting over there and ops say - "the table's good" and fold up their cards, you just smile and say, thanks? I don't think so !

In SAYC the 1NT bidder could bid 2NT - that would not bar partner who would be authorised to "know" that it could mean 6-10 pts.

Sorry, the last sentence in my reply was directed to "you guys" here in the forum - I wouldn't say that to the players.

It wasn't a psyche bid - it was a totally innocent misbid by a very new, inexperienced player who knew that 6 hearts or 6 spades and about 6-10 pts was a weak 2 opening, and looked at his weak hand with 6 clubs and opened 2C.

Something seems not quite ethical about EW accepting the concession to me - I get the sense from their question to the TD that they knew S was going to take the rest of the tricks on a "normal" line of play. So, I would answer the question, Yes, South CAN concede and give you trick, but are you going to take it? I don't know about you guys, but I wouldn't.

The 2♣ bid was alerted immediately by partner (circled), and when asked by opponents was explained as strong, etc. Beginners here are initially taught that hearts, spades and diamonds are weak (6+ of suit, 8-10 points) and they usually do not rebid after making a weak 2 opening, even if partner changes suit.

Isn't it interesting (and I mean that honestly, not tongue in cheek or sarcastic) how so many excellent directors can view one simple incident from such totally different perspectives. Maybe you had to be there to judge the disruption caused. I should add that we do have a strict policy about mobile phones - this guy obviously slipped through the cracks because he is so new. I do allow people who are expecting an urgent call to keep their phones on during play (hopefully on vibrate or a very quiet ring tone) but they need to confirm it with me prior to play.

I might just add (I think I mentioned it in the opening to this thread) that this ring tone wasn't just a "ring ring" - it was a particularly annoying, musical, loud, stupid ring tone that went off not once, but twice - together with the director hissing and the player fumbling and bumbling - all this happening right in the declarer's face when she was 2/3 of the way through playing the hand. Coincidentally, the mobile phone owner was the same player I (jokingly) suggested that I follow around the week before to correct his bidding during session 1 of this same team event! David!! now you made me feel bad about not being able to turn off a mobile phone :)

I have never owned and rarely used a mobile phone. I remember last year taking my three grandchildren to Melbourne for a few days and my daughter armed me with her mobile phone -I wrote the number on the back of some tags the children wore around their necks so if they got lost the finder could contact me quickly. We went into the Planetarium where there were signs - TURN OFF MOBILE PHONES!! I had not a clue how to do that (and spent the entire visit feeling sick - quite sure the damn thing was going to ring), so I did have SOME sympathy for the player.

Christine

Here is a messy one that happened to me yesterday during a red point Teams event. Team 2 were playing Team 9 and North player Team 2 was the declarer in 3NT. Part way through the hand West's mobile phone went off - with a particularly loud and annoying ring tone. I jogged (not a pretty sight) across to the table and told him to turn it off, which he did (or I thought he did). I had only taken a few steps away from the table when it rang again. I turned back and said "turn it off!!!" and he said "I don't know how". I told him to go outside and lock it in his car which he did. However, by that stage, poor North had totally lost the plot and ended up going 1-off. On the layout of the cards I thought 3NT might be difficultto make so I told them to score it up as 3NT going 1-off and that I would think about it and reassess it later. Meanwhile, at the other table, North player Team 9 was also in a 3NT contract on the same board making! This now gives Team 2 a very nasty score of -700 (12 imps which I think equates to about 6 VPS on a 10 board match). The situation did seem very unfair to me and I decided to restore equity by giving Team 2 3NT making at their table - a "wash" on that board. My decision meant that Team 2 was the eventual winner of the event by 2 VPS (114) over Team 3 (112) and Team 1 (108), although I was unaware of that at the time. No-one is upset or worried about it - I just like to go through any decisions I make during the day when I get home, and I am not too sure about this one. On the one hand it FEELS right, but I don't actually have any LAW to support the decision I made. What is the correct procedure and under which Law would you rule please.

Give me a couple of better ones to use please

excellent! that has been my interpretation too - but I am struggling to get the message across.

I'm not sure that the regulation is actually suggesting that you look at the hand - merely indicating that with such a hand, an unintended bid of 2S over 1S COULD occur. Maybe the person was thinking "ops bid 1S, I'm going to bid 2C" then brain conniption takes over and they write 2S. I suppose what I'm asking is, after partner alerts the bid and the player realises (to his horror) what he has actually written, could this be interpreted as an unintended bid? I think yes - and this is the point I want to make to my peer directors - that the bid doesn't have to be altered in the same breath or the same stroke of the pen.

I just found the following written in "Zone 7 Law Interpretation, Regulation and Guidance" (effrective 1st June 2008) - Would you agree with these examples?

Amongst our group of keen but inexperienced directors we are currently trying to get our heads around Law 25 Unintended Call. The perception has been that the change has to be made quickly - that the "pause for thought" requirement almost becomes the old chestnut of not taking your pen from the bidding pad! I am trying to get the idea across that we should be more focusing on the "pause for thought" and that someone could make a call and perhaps not realise what they had written for some time - maybe even until after LHO had made a call. I seem to recall reading on one of the Directors' websites that it is even possible that PARTNER could in some way alert the bidder to the unintended call. Can you give me a couple of scenarios I can use to best illustrate this please.

OK guys, bear in mind that I am a newbie - but we have pre-dealt boards and have hand records available (deep finessed to show the contract that COULD be made). If there is a problem with 12 cards in one pocket and 14 in another it is easily fixed. I have never even HEARD of curtain cards.

OK I'll be the dummy WTH is a curtain card ?

I give NS a trick - Law 64A2 - and the trick on which the revoke occurred was not won by the offending player, then if the offending side won that or any subsequent trick, after play ends one trick is transferred to the non-offending side.

:) I wonder if David has recovered yet Yeah, I didn't really mean it - and I actually did explain to the "damaged" ops that they were aware of how "new" he was and probably should have realised it wasn't a 22+ unbalanced hand simply by looking at their own hands and that they needed to just get on with it. There is, I believe, the legitimate opportunity of asking his partner to leave the table while he explains a bid IF she indicates that she doesn't know, or has forgotten what the bid means. In fact, that did happen later in the day when he opened the bidding 2NT and she didn't know if it was 20-22 pts balanced or undetermined strength and showing both minors. For campboy - In Australia we play for masterpoints - normal club games are green, a club championship event is red and National events are gold. In order to attain certain rankings - State Master, National Master, Life Master, etc. players need to have a certain total number of masterpoints and for some categories it includes a minimum number of red and/or gold points, so they are keenly sought after. Most smaller clubs would have the opportunity of running about 10 red point events per year.

We were playing a red point teams championship event yesterday and one of the teams had a player not long out of lessons. He opened 2C which was alerted by partner and subsequently explained as 22+ unbalanced - partner bid 2H which was passed out. When dummy appeared on the table it contained 6 clubs and about 7 points. Their system (they actually had a card on the table!) was as partner described and he had misbid. I read Law 75C - (mistaken call) "regardless of damage, the director shall allow the result to stand" but they were mighty unhappy as they had game in spades. I had to agree (to myself) that it did seem a bit tough on the opposition but my sympathy faded when one of the opposition came up to me later saying that "people like him shouldn't be allowed to play in red point events blah blah blah" I had a few similar incidents with the same player later in the day and I was wondering (only half in jest I might add) whether I should follow him around and whenever his partner was asked to explain a call, get her to leave the table and have HIM explain what he was bidding. At least the opponents would get a decent chance at bidding and playing the hand properly. (I can hear David falling to the floor in a dead faint - THUMP!!)

It looks as though I may have to stand corrected - but when opponent shows his hand and says "rest are mine" and I don't agree, I think that play ceases from that point and Director needs to make the decision. When I queried my opponent on Saturday he said he had the top 2 trumps and the best spade - which was TRUE - but he didn't factor in that my p was on lead.

Well said blackshoe. An opponent in a club contract claimed against me on Saturday, holding KQ of clubs (all small diamonds in dummy) and the K of spades. I had the T8 of clubs and J of spades - but unfortunately for him my p was on lead and led the Ace of hearts - then he complained to the Director that I hadn't allowed him to make a line of play (WHAT LINE OF PLAY?) but called the Director immediately he said "rest are mine".

OK I'm going to try this - I must say that when you get to a table here, most people will say "I didn't mean to bid that" all the while flashing their cards in your face. SO, I will say "put your cards away - tell me what you meant to bid" - I will explain Law 25 - and see what happens. Thanks for your patience guys !! :rolleyes:

..... so, if I am reading all the posts correctly, you are asking me to make a judgment as TD on whether a person is being truthful about his "intention" when making a bid, based on my perception of his body language and demeanour. In other words, if I disallow a change, I am saying that I think he is telling lies which means that I am going to allow the change every time! I think I would be happier to NOT look at the cards but to take the person away from the table and ask him what his intended bid was and why he bid 1H (or 1C or whatever). As we use written bidding pretty much exclusively the problem of "mechanical error" is not such an issue. When these situations arise they are usually brain farts !