Subbing adjustment ... or not

[geofspa]

I need some advice

 

During a team game, being played as a round robin event, there was a need to make a substitution during the bidding.

 

When the sub joined the table he doubled and without any discussion his partner passed.

 

This is the hand and bidding

 

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=sajh874d872ckt532&w=sk642h93dkt5caqj6&e=s9853haq6dq643c97&s=sqt7hkjt52daj9c84]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

- - p p

 

1NT p p 2H

p p X p

p p

 

the substitution was made during the bidding.

 

The EW partnership after substitution had no sytem discussion at all double and pass by both was undiscussed.

 

this gained 12 imps for the NS partnership in this match.

 

should I be thinking of making any adjustments to this board.

[jillybean]

Was West playing ACOL (1nt on 13 points) and was the sub playing ACOL?

 

If E/W could have discussed a system but chose not to, no adjustment – if time was a factor an artificial adjusted score could be warranted. The laws dont deal well with this sort of call <_<

 

jb

[blackshoe]

Before you can adjust, you have to find a legal justification for it. I don't see one here.

[helene_t]

I don't see what you could adjust to. What would have happened if the partnership had discussed a system? Maybe West wouldn't have opened 1NT. Maybe East wouldn't have passed initiaally. Maybe East wouldn't have doubled. Maybe West wouldn't have passed. But many intermediate-level partnerships do not have specific agreements about this double, although most have probably discussed a direct-seat double over an intervention over 1NT, and it's possible that this situation is analogous. What about the defense? Was it influenced by the fact that they didn't have any partnership agreement?

 

I think you should have thrown the board out on beforehand, but now it's too late. Result stands.

 

The problem with adjusting such boards after a misunderstanding has happened and led to a bad result is that it gives subs a positive bias as they can still get a good result from a misunderstanding, and a non-sub pair can still get a bad result from a misunderstanding.

[paulg]

It's obviously unfortunate when these incidents occur in a friendly tournament. Clearly none of the players are expecting specific rules to cover this but are just looking for a 'common sense' ruling. With hindsight I can see that offering advice immediately was wrong and it would have more realistic to tell the teams that this would be looked at and a ruling published later.

 

So please ignore what I said at the time! ^_^

 

Firstly, I do think it is wrong to consider the score on the board when making the decision. That is incidental to the ruling and should not be a factor.

 

With a bit more time to think, I believe it is wrong to permit a substitute to play a board that has started. For example, the substitute may have been kibitzing the table, or another one playing the same hands. My approach would be to say that no result is possible on the board and award A+ (+3 IMPs) to the non-offending side (Laws 12A1, 86A). The hand should be played out only to get to the next one.

 

Of course my view is contrary to the practice in most tournaments on BBO, but there are practical considerations there that would make this approach less appealing.

 

Good luck!

 

Paul