You are the director

[benlessard]

VUL NS --- west deal

 

(1H)---2H*---(4H)---Pass

 

(pass)--X-----(p)------4S

 

(p)----p-----(X)----all pass

 

 

2H was michael but the NS pair had an agreement that 1Nt showed 15-18 one or 2 suited. So the 2H is less then 14 pts of a stronger hand then 18 pts.

 

The X by north was very slow (everybody agreed on this) and explained as showing about 20 pts of strenght.

 

South bid 4S

 

on

 

654

xxx

Qxxx

98x

 

4Sx making and 4Hx is also making.

 

Does the slow double suggest south to bid 4S ?

Do you find south 4S reasonnable ?

Does the fact that East X 4S change anything ?

[Guest Jlall]

The slow X doesn't suggest bidding, it just suggests a minimumish X. There is also no logical alternative to bidding 4S anwyays, the X just suggests a good michaels not a trump stack.

[cherdano]

I don't understand how you can bid 2♥ in this system and then have anything to think about later. To even consider double you must have 19+ and with so many hcps passing isn't an option.

 

So maybe doubler has extra shape as well and was considering bidding rather than doubling again? If that is the case then obviously bidding is suggested over passing.

 

But in any case, as Justin said there is no logical alternative to 4♠, the double is not a penalty double.

[Guest Jlall]

can't you just have a good 14 like AKxxx x AKxxx xx?

[karlson]

Funny, that's the exact hand (except minors reversed) I came up with when I was trying to construct hands on which passing could be right.

 

I agree with Arend -- partner may have been thinking of bidding 4s, so the hesitation does at least suggest bidding. (Though in general I very much like the idea that hesitations should not constrain you much when there are many possible things to think about).

[cherdano]

can't you just have a good 14 like AKxxx x AKxxx xx?

No idea, I know I would upgrade this to 1N if I played a system like this, but I find it hard to get into the minds of those who like such a system.

[zasanya]

As others have pointed out there is no LA to 4♠.So result stands.As director I will give a warning to North though.The x of 4♠ does not change anything imo.

[paulg]

... As director I will give a warning to North though. ....

A warning! Why? It's not an infraction to think unless there is an intention to deceive.

 

It may be appropriate, depending on level/experience, to remind players that taking a long time to make a call may create unauthorised information that constrains the actions of their partner, but I would stress that it is absolutely fine to take their time when they need to.

 

Paul

[nige1]

NS vul West deals

South bid 4♠ on ♠ 654 ♥xxx ♦ Qxxx ♣ 98x

(1♥) 2♥ (4♥) _P

(_P) _X (_P) 4♠

(_P) _P (_X) AP

2♥ = alerted as Michaels but the NS pair had an agreement that 1N showed 15-18 one or 2 suited. So the 2H is less then 14 pts or a stronger hand then 18 pts.

_X by north = very slow (everybody agreed on this) and explained as showing about 20 pts of strength.

4♠X making and 4♥x is also making.

Does the slow double suggest that south bid 4♠ ?

IMO it depends on the NS style. Must Michaels be at least 55 or does it sometimes show 54? Systemically, North's _X shows 20+. What would North do with 19 or JLall's 14? Does the _X also show transferable vaiues or is it mainly penalty? IMO, the hesitation suggests that the _X is flawed in some way. It is not clear to a third party how it may be flawed. In my experience hesitant doubles usually suggest bidding rather than passing.

Do you find south 4♠ reasonable ?

IMO 4♠ is reasonable but _P may be a logical alternative. Obviously, our opinions are less important than a poll of South's peers.

Does the fact that East X 4♠ change anything ?

Suppose that the director judges that the North's slow _X suggests 4♠ over _P and _P is a logical alternative. In most jurisdictions, the director may still deny EW redress if he considers East's _X to be "wild and gambling". IMO, this is an insane regulation. Without seeing the relevant hand, you can't tell if it applies here.

[hotShot]

NS is red!

 

Assuming that there is a convention card to prove the agreement, without the hesitation North showed a hand with 19+ HCP, 5+♠ a 5+ minor and only 3 cards in the remaining suits. This means there is (should be) additional distributional strength.

 

South has fit in both of North suits and no defensive values.

 

Without the hesitation I don't think pass is a LA.

 

One possible reason for the hesitation might be:

North had doubts that he is strong enough to bid r/w. So the hesitation is suggesting to pass.

 

My impression is that with the hesitation, I would consider to pass. So my impression is that "pass" is the bid suggested by the hesitation.

 

So with the hesitation I think I have to bid 4♠.

Opps double suggests that North is not as strong as he needs to be for his bid.

[Finch]

I think the slow double suggests we bid.

However, I don't think there is a LA to 4S.

[jtfanclub]

My impression is that with the hesitation, I would consider to pass. So my impression is that "pass" is the bid suggested by the hesitation.

I agree with Hotshot. Surely the bid he was considering was pass.