Richard_E

I'm ashamed that we adjusted to be honest. At the time I thought I should not favour my own team, as it was one of our players who paused. I also thought that Law 73 gave a basis for adjusting. As East was woolgathering - trying to figure out where the setting trick was coming from - it was hard for the player to see how to repair the damage. The statement seemed a fair effort. Knowing both players I'm sure East did not intend to deceive, and that North was put under pressure that was not deserved. I think he felt he could not easily make a rational decision about his play. I suspect I was trying to apply what I thought was justice rather than the Law. Probably a beginner's error for a TD. :) As an aside when should the director be called! After the pause and comment or after the ruff?

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=sha107632dj1063cq92&w=sq97hq98dq85c10853&e=s108653h5da974cj74&s=sakj42hkj4dk2cak6]399|300|Scoring: IMP 4♠ by North - I don't have the bidding![/hv] This was played from the North hand on the lead of the ♣4. Declarer won the Ace and played ♠AK2, pitching a couple of diamonds and a heart. West returned ♣3 to dummy's ♣K. Now ♠J was cashed, followed by the ♥K. East thought for some time with the singleton♥5. Then apologised and said there was nothing to think about before playing it. Declarer then played ♥J and went up with the ♥A which was ruffed. Down one and cue the director. Law 73D1 requires players to be careful about their tempo when variations may work to the benefit of their side. The law effectively ends by saying that declarer draws inferences at his own risk. Here I found the ruling difficult as there was nothing to think about on the play of the card whatever East's hearts were! The ruling we arrived at split the loss, 50% of 4♠ making 50% one down. declarer's claim was that the hesitation made it very difficult to guess right, and that vacant spaces with East marked with 5 spades to West's three improves the percentage for the second round finesse. I feel uneasy about the ruling. What do the legal eagles think?

I asked this when I met him a day or so later. It does, he chose not to bid it. That seems wrong to me as their 1♦ bid is overloaded with meanings. At other tables on the night Souths opened 1NT if they were playing 12-14 or 14-16, invariably ending in a major suit game. The 1♥ starts a series of relays, where the 1♦ bidder describes shape, more shape, then strength and so on. Any bid on the second round other than the relay shows weak or intermediate with Hearts. What I wanted to know before ruling was whether there was an agreement over this kind of intervention. The answer I got at the time was as stated at the start of the post. I have since received an email saying that 3♠ would in fact be non-forcing showing Hearts and Spades, and that Double, 3NT or 4♣ would show the strong option. It also argued that the North hand is significantly worse with Spades over it as suggested by the comment, and there may not be a fit in either major.

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=s108732hakj865d4c3&w=sqj4h93dq1086ckj106&e=s9h72dak753cq8754&s=sak65hq104dj92ca92]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] North South play Viking Precision with a 14-16 1NT. East West play SAYC. The Auction went: ---E---S---W---N ---P--1♦---P--1♥ -2NT--X--3♣--3♥ --4♣---P---P---P 1♦ was alerted (11-13HCP balanced, or 11-15HCP without a 5 card major or good 6 card Club suit) 1♥ from North was either 6+HCP with Hearts or an any shape game force. East's 2NT was not alerted. South's double showed 14-15HCP and wasn't alerted. West's 3♣ was after some thought, and at this point North asked about the 3NT. This was described in terms equivalent to "Not discussed but likely to be Spades and Clubs" 4♣ went one off, but clearly North-South can make 11 tricks in either major. North says that with an explanation of what East had she would have bid 3♠ and been raised to 4♠ making an overtrick. The explanation made it difficult to bid Spades and had thus been damaging. I was asked to give a ruling so I asked North about the meaning of 3♥ and 3♠ bids in this auction. 3♥ is natural non-forcing. 3♠ is FG with Spades the main suit, the 1♥ with this continuation does not show Hearts. I was satisfied that East-West had no agreement as to the 2NT bid, although West should not have tried to be helpful by nominating suits. I let the score stand as I thought it unlikely that North would overbid the hand as being FG with Spades the main suit, having made a non-forcing bid in the actual auction. My view was that the poor score was caused by not bidding 4♥ over either 3♣, or 4♣, after South failed to double that. North-South were advised of their right to appeal, but after a number of emails flying about decided not to. If they had appealed to you - what would you have done?