MI

[NickRW]

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s6htdkt876cak8543&w=sakq9752hq73dq4cj&e=st83hj965dj5ct762&s=sj4hak842da932cq9]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

This is a hand that possibly one or two of the Brits on this board will have played recently - it was from Monday night's sim pairs.

 

At my table (sitting NS) the bidding went 1♥-2♠-dbl-pass-3♦-4♠-5♦ all pass. The contract is simple for an overtrick when the trumps behave nicely. No problem.

 

Results round the room were 6♦ making once, 5♦ with an over 4 times, either 2♠ one off doubled or 3♠ two off once, 3♦ with 3 overs once and 2♠ one off undoubled twice. (Yeah, we're not, as a group, a bunch of contenders about to take anyone's place in the national team!)

 

My question about this concerns events at another table where the director might have been called, but wasn't. I was wondering what should have been said if that had happened though?

 

The players involved E/W are inexperienced intermediates who play together a fair bit - so should know their system in theory - they have an overall average of 51.5% at the club where this is played, but rising. North is an experienced intermediate with an average of about 53.5% with her regular partners - but doesn't play so often with the person sitting south who is simply not very good at all.

 

The bidding at this table starts 1♥-2♠ as before. North now enquires of East what the 2♠ shows. And is told (I quote his partner's words) "23 to 25". She concludes that this means "strong" and passes. Everyone else passes. The defence take their 5 side suit bosses and a heart ruff for one off. As this is the last round of the night, they open the traveller to find that this is an abysmal score for NS.

 

North now admonishes East for giving misinformation (fair enough really as it was!), and says that she should really call the director because of it - but doesn't.

 

E/W's card clearly says "intermediate" for jump overcalls - but this was not consulted during play (as is ever the case!).

 

I was wondering what should have happened had the director actually been called. I must admit that my feeling, had I been in such a person's shoes would be to say, "Your partner opened, you're looking at an ace and 2 kings and a 6-5 shape in the two unbid suits and you want me to believe that your side was damaged by an obviously farcical description of an overcall - surely you must be joking". I have a feeling that this would not meet with a bridge lawyer's interpretation of the rules - perhaps someone can put me right!

 

Nick

[TimG]

IMO, "23-25" is enough of a clue that East's description is wrong. As you point out, north can also look at his own hand, consider his partner's opening bid and know that "23-25" is not accurate. Perhaps the director should have been called, but that does not mean that an adjustment should be made.

 

At the end of the auction, West should have informed the opponents that the explanation was incorrect. And, perhaps the director should have been called at that time.

[crazy4hoop]

I think there is also the responsibility of the non-offenders to continue to play bridge. Some may argue that North's passing is so egregious that it constitutes not continuing to play bridge. I probably would not adjust the score but strongly caution EW to give complete and, I guess, serious, explanations of partner's call (admonishing east then) as not everybody "gets the joke."

[Elianna]

I don't know why everyone thinks that East was joking. Maybe they play strong 2's, and East missed the 1♥ bid. Not likely, I realize, but possible.

 

I completely agree that West should have said something at the end of the auction.

 

I also think that North should either call the director, or not say anything.

[peachy]

All else aside, East has no right to admonish the opponent(s) of misinformation or of anything else. If there was a problem, he should have called the director. And yes, there was a problem if the explanation was 22-25, and it was not corrected before opening lead was made. If he had explained 32-35, the joke would have been obvious...

[david_c]

Actually, West has 24 points on the "rule of X" scale. Maybe that's what East meant.

[NickRW]

Well, something to consider here guys. To my mind North doesn't really have much of a case as making a double or possibly 3♣ call seems obvious enough regardless of the strength of the overcall. But what about South? I think an experienced MP player, over a weak or even intermediate bid, would possibly compete further - but over a strong jump overcall - well - I think maybe I wouldn't - too much of a chance of propelling them into a game they've already missed would be my thought. So, North as an individual seems to have a frivolous case to me, but NS as a partnership - maybe not.

 

I guess this is my real question. Does the frivolousness of North's position negate any merit to South's case (as a partnership they should have found something better than defending 2♠ regardless of whether South re-opens or not). Or, is the frivolousness of North's position actually irrelevant under the laws since South could be considered to have a case anyway.

 

Something not very relevant to the whole thing - but which you should know - East has a history of what you might call 'poor' explanations of his partner's bids - not through any malice or making fun - he a) counts points by a different system and sometimes has trouble converting back to hcp and b] is very much a hands on learner type of person - if you give him a deck of cards and ask him to construct a hand typical for his partner's bid he can do it - but putting that into words is often something he finds not easy - as is remembering actual numbers in even his own system (in his system an intermediate jump is actually 17 to 22). This is an ongoing problem - not made any better because club members often actively refuse to read convention cards and insist on a verbal explanation.

 

Nick

[helene_t]

(random silliness deleted)

 

Maybe it would be good advice to East to advice opps to read the CC when they ask a question.

[JoAnneM]

Please diagram the hand to show 24 points, I am just curious.

[mr1303]

David means a "rule of 24" bid.

 

This means you add your HCP (14) to the number of cards in your two longest suits (7 spades + 3 hearts).

 

Therefore West has a rule of 24 bid.