jh51

Accordomg to ACBL regulations: At this club there was a single 5 table section, so a playing director was allowed. I seem to recall a recent change concerning eligibilty of a playing director to win master points in a STAC game. My recollection, which could easily be wrong, was to allow the playing director to win section master points in a STAC game but not overall awards. I think that previously the director (and partner)could not receive master points.

I guess I failed to mention that North had discovered her mis-sort sometime between her 1♣ insufficient bid and her 2♠ bid. With only 3 HCP and 4 clubs, my East partner might well have passed 1♣. As noted, at the end of the night I was happy with the table result (a match point top) but not how we got there. In the discussion of the possible weighted scores, I think they all result in zeroes for NS.

I have corrected the diagram. Because he did not want to see what was going on, the director did not come to the table and ruled from the table where hw was playing. He basicly allowed North to correct the bid to 2♣ without further repercussions. He made some remarks that since "everyone knew what was going on" we had no reason to beleive that North's bid was Michaels. I was thinking at the time that had we the correct ruling, he would have been in a 2C contract and that without the UI (everyone, including South knew this was not Michaels, but If allowed to bid, South should bid as though it were) it would seem that South would want to be in 4H with a presumed double fit and a void in West's suit. I am of course assuming that 2♠ by a Michaels bidder after partner bids 2♥ os a forward going bid.

Obviously not. The intent was to say that there were two other people there who ran games at the club on other nights and had experience directing club games. BUt I thnik you got that.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa72ha9862dq7542c&w=s63hkq3djt6cakj62&n=sqj984hjdak9cq973&e=skt5ht754d83ct854&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=pp1c2c(see%20comments)p2hp2sppp]399|300[/hv] The 2♣ bid was preceded by an insufficient 1♣ bid. The director was called, but on this particular night at the club, he was playing and neither he nor the other two club level directors in attendence had played the board yet. (This was the second round.) North said she was simply going to make the bid sufficient, and the director remarked that the new bid would not have the same meaning as a 1♣ opening bid. North-South play Michaels, so this is clearly the case. I think that the ruling on the hand was not correct, once North bids 2♣ and that South should now be barred from the bidding for at least one round. (But I am not a director, so I may have this wrong. I assume just one round, but aren't there certain cases where IB's partner is barred for the rest of the auction?) When South is not barred by the director, I would think that she has UI that North has a 1♣ and not a Muchaels bid. It would seem to me that if South treated 2♣ as Michaels, passing 2♠ is not a LA. In fact, I would think that once North bids 2♠, these is no LA to 4♥. Would I be right in thinking that with a proper rulling, the final contract would likely have been 2♣ by North, most likely going down. Once South is not barred, 4♥ (or more) seems inevitable. This contract is almost certainly doomed. Additioanl comments: North had missorted her cards and had a spade amongst the clubs. At the end of the night I considered asking the director to take a further look at this, but I found we already had a top. North found a way to take only 9 tricks when everyone else was taking 10 if they played in spades. One North played 3NT had made 5 (bad defense I suppose.)

I don't know if he invented it, but the method you describe is discussed in Dr. Neil Timm's book 2/1 Game Force A Modern Approach. He calls the 3♣/3♦ bids combined Bergen raises. 3 of the other major is an ambiguous splinter. The next step (3♠ or 3NT) asks for the short suit.

And the Summer 2011 casebook is now available on the ACBL website. Now you can start whining about Fall 2011.

Not last summer - it was October.

For what it's worth, I have a friend who works at ACBL headquarters whose responsibilites include overseeing the publishing the NABC casebooks. When she was hired last fall she found a backlog in this area. She explained to me that there are many steps along the way from the hand written notes the AC provides to the final published product. Lawyers, editors, and expert panelists can all introduce delays.

How experienced is responder? On a couple of occassions I had a beginner partner pass my forcing bids. In one case I had creatively reversed into a 2 card suit (don't ask why) and she passed with a singleton. Not a good result considering we were cold for slam.

The club had not been identified at this point. And it was not Pattaya in any case. Just out of couriosity, do you have some issue with the Pattaya brige club?

Kanter recommends 012wo2w3 and notes that 3 is rare. One really has to wonder about 4 since that means the asker has a void and no key cards.

My favorite loss was in a Men's Regional Swiss (many years ago). Small field (24 tables, the concurrent Women's was much bigger). After 3 rounds our team with less than 1000 MPs among us were still undefeateed and in first my a few victory points. We found ourselves playing a team of pros, each of whom had far more master points tham our entire team. 6 of the 7 boards were fairly close - we were losing by a handful of IMPs. On the 7th board, we bid to 6NT (should have gone to 7NT) and made 7. At the other table the pros bid to 7♣, which would have failed when our teammate led from his 7 card diamond suit and dummy had promised 5 and declarer implied at least 1. Alas, our teammate with the diamond void decided that now was a good time to take a sacrifice, and 7♥x would have still won us the match. However, that gave the pro the chance to get things right with 7NT. The win would have been a huge upset win for our team. The loss was something to be remembered forever.

1st or 2nd seat clear pass at any vulnerability. 3rd seat I might get frisky at favorable vulnerability. It is likely that LHO has a really good hand. 4th seat I wonder who forgot to open as I quickly pass.

But when the are enforced, oh what fun. Last year I was at a tournament when, during a hospitality break, someone's cell phone rang in the playing area. A full board penalty was assessed. (the dinze of the prnalty had been announced before the start of play.) Even though it was during the hospitality break, it was in the playing area, so there was no excues.