Appeals Ruling

[blackshoe]

Hm. You make a good point Frances. B}

 

It seems that while Nigel said he agreed with my ruling, he's actually more in line with Frances' approach, and feels that the OS is in a worse position after the second offense. After all, if 2♠ is going down, 4♠ has to be going down more. So perhaps we do have to consider both offenses. It is nonetheless true that in considering the first offense, the later second offense has no impact on the rectification we determine. It may (and it seems it should in this case) affect the final rectification.

[jtfanclub]

I don't like the argument that because I didn't mention it to the director immediately, it shouldn't be a factor in the final decision.

 

First off, the director may have asked several dozen questions of the offended people and then asked for a quick reason for the offenders to explain themselves. The player in question might have several arguments available (all of which would be true) and just chose the one most likely to sway the director. Giving a bunch of reasons all at once sounds like excuse manufacturing.

 

Secondly, the person may have just realized it subconsciously. If there had been no delay and no UI, I would have realized something was wrong, but it's very likely that I would not have realized it was that my partner passed the 1 club until I analyzed it later. I'd just know that something going on was impossible.

 

Thirdly, saying "My partner is such an idiot that I'm lucky if he remembers Stayman. Of course if I'm given a choice between partner forgot and some almost-impossible combination of hands I'm going to choose the moron option" might not be the most politically correct thing to say, considering that you still have to finish the game with the person in question. This would especially be true if the guy who forgot the transfer was a client and the guy who was trying to ensure that he'd play the hand was getting paid for the privilege.

[nige1]

And I still don't buy that his partner with

QJxxx, Kxxx,xx,xx must bid over 1 ♣.

Come on, that's not a game force opposite 15+ to 18. Nor an invitation (remember 1♠ was bid on his left.)

Special pleading: IMO the right action may depend on your methods. Many people define a transfer followed by a change of suit as a game force. But some of us treat the 3♥ rebid, initially, as a natural trial-bid, instead. Whatever your agreement in other contexts, that is a sensible understanding in a competitive auction like this; and if partner habitually overcalls 1N on 19+HCP, then a game try is more reasonable.