Enough?

[adhoc3]

The reported hand is from BBO tourney.

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s4haq97653dq83ca7&w=sa8752hk82da4c862&e=skqt93hjdt97ckt94&s=sj6ht4dkj652cqj53]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

the bidding went:

 

pass----pass-----1H------pass

1NT-----pass------2H-----pass

pass----2S--------3H-----pass

pass----3S--------pass---pass

dbl//

 

I was sitting south. TD was called after dummy shown. The doubled 3S was made. TD adjust the result as NS A+.

 

Question:

 

1)Do you think the TD's decision is reasonable?

2)Does West need a sound reason to support his bidding?

3)If a player fails to put forward his reason behind his 'strange bidding'(according ro TD's judgement), Should a TD take action just because of suspecting UI tranferred?

 

Many thanks,

[mr1303]

1) No. Given that a result was attained, he shouldn't adjust to Ave+, or any combination of averages. Either the 3S bid is allowed, or it isn't, in which case the board should probably be adjusted to NS +140 for 3H making exactly (whilst trumps are playable for no losers this is not very likely)

 

2) If East passed in tempo, then no, he doesn't need a good reason for bidding 3S. However, I would find this difficult to believe (that East did pass in tempo). Anyone is allowed to make a bad bid at any time, and doesn't need a reason for making a bid, so long as he isn't using any UI

 

3) I think overall I would probably disallow the 3S bid unless it was clear that there was no hesitation from East. However, it does annoy me when I ask a player a question when I'm directing and I get no reply. I'll tend to be more sympathetic to the opponents whenever someone ignores me.

 

Having said all of that, UI cases are difficult to tell with online bridge. East may have gone to the loo, gone to get a beer, be checking his e-mails etc.

[Finch]

1)Do you think the TD's decision is reasonable?

2)Does West need a sound reason to support his bidding?

3)If a player fails to put forward his reason behind his 'strange bidding'(according ro TD's judgement), Should a TD take action just because of suspecting UI tranferred?

 

Many thanks,

1) No. A result was obtained, you cannot cancel the board.

2) No. If everybody needed a sound reason for their bidding or the board was cancelled, you wouldn't get many results to imp against.

3) No. You cannot 'suspect' UI to adjust, you have to show that there is UI.

 

I wouldn't have bid 3S here, but a cooperative West might say:

- South has denied four spades

- North has clearly got 7 hearts or so, and is unlikely to have a spade suit on the side

- therefore we should have a spade fit

 

But unless there is evidence that West had UI, there is no reason to adjust. And South's double was barking, by the way.

 

Look at this slightly differently, if cancelling the 3S is OK because of 'strange bidding' then we are allowing the TD to say:

 

"I don't think your bidding was correct. In fact, I think the only reason you bid like that was because you had UI. As my bidding judgement is better than yours, you don't get to keep the result."

[Walddk]

1. No.

2. No.

3. Which UI? West bid East card's with his 3♠, but there is no rule against that.

 

Adjusting the score is wrong and shows that the TD in question is incompetent.

 

Roland

[david_c]

2) If East passed in tempo, then no, he doesn't need a good reason for bidding 3S. [...] Anyone is allowed to make a bad bid at any time, and doesn't need a reason for making a bid, so long as he isn't using any UI

Indeed. And this sort of bad bid is not particularly unusual I would say.

 

The TD certainly should not try and "deduce" a hesitation from the auction. You might take the view that unless N/S claimed there was as hesitation, there is no case to answer. I would prefer to investigate whether there was a hesitation even if N/S did not say anything about one (after all, they may not know that it is relevant). But this can be tricky, particularly online.

[pigpenz]

NO

NO

and from the post you didnt state that there were any hesitations or UI things. Sure something looks suspect with E/W bidding but then that doesnt give NS the right to make an unusual double.

[pclayton]

Don't adjust.

 

A succesful result that comes from a strange call is not evidence of UI.

[keylime]

I can't see how East-West with 10 spades NOT compete to 3 spades. Even if there is a massive tank job I can't see many logical alternatives outside of bidding 3 spades.

 

Then again, bridge players at times are a litigious lot.