Clarification Period

[Chris3875]

Here is an interesting situation reported to me as having occurred at a local Congress. Opposition bidding went 1S - 3S - 4C (Gerber) - all pass. THEN the director was called and he took the player who passed the Gerber ace ask away from the table - when they came back he allowed her to change her call and they ultimately ended up in 6S making. TD said that the auction period had not ended because defenders had not made the opening lead and that the pass was unintended and could be changed during the clarification period. I was amazed but the TD is very experienced and I cannot believe he would have made a mistake (no, that was not tongue in cheek).

 

I would have made them play it in 4C and suggested that they be a little more alert to the bidding in future - what is your ruling pls.

[blackshoe]

if the auction ends before it reaches the player’s partner, no substitution may occur after the end of the auction period (see Law 22).

the auction period ends when, subsequent to the end of the auction as in A2 above, either defender faces an opening lead.

The director was correct that the end of the auction does not end a player's right to change an unintended call. However,

a player may substitute his intended call for an unintended call but only if he does so, or attempts to do so, without pause for thought.

(Emphasis mine). I think that when you take a player away from the table and ask whether his last call was unintended, there has been a pause for thought. I would not have allowed the change, unless it was this player who called the director, and he did so because he wished to change his final pass. Although if that were the case I confess I don't see why the TD took the player away from the table.

[aguahombre]

Hey, neat. I want to go back to '68 when I fully explained and then passed my partner's splinter --costing me my first regional pairs victory. Can we exhume Max?

[blackshoe]

No, we can't exhume Max. ;)

 

The laws in this area may well have been different in 1968.

[iviehoff]

Hey, neat. I want to go back to '68 when I fully explained and then passed my partner's splinter --costing me my first regional pairs victory.

If the auction period has come to an end, its too late.

[Chris3875]

I am totally guessing here, but I am thinking that the player who passed the 4C ace ask probably thought her partner had bid 4S, so at the time she passed, she MEANT to pass - then horror of horrors, she probably noticed the S was in fact a C. I would have been totally tuff and ruled that the pass was intended - no change allowed - keep your eyes open in future.

[aguahombre]

Certainly nobody intends to pass an artificial forcing bid, unless they psyched. I thought the allowing of sustitute calls was to remedy a "mechanical error", not a brain fart.

 

The green card is in a different slot from the bid cards.

[bluejak]

It is not impossible to allow a Law 25A change from a different part of the box. But the cited case is a traditional one, and is hte reason why Kaplan introduced Law 25B. Now that unlamented law is history, no change is possible. Sorry, your TD was wrong. It was not an unintended call. It was not in time.

[iviehoff]

Sorry, your TD was wrong. It was not an unintended call. It was not in time.

I don't see that you can be so categorical about it. From the description, it could be in time. It probably isn't an unintended call, but it's not impossible.

 

If a player who has made an unintended call calls the director the moment they notice the call is not what they intended, partner has not called, and the auction period has not ended, then it is in time, because in, effect, time stops once the director is called. It seems to me possible from OP's description it is in time.

 

There does seem to be a misunderstanding about what is an "unintended" call. An unintended call, within the laws of bridge, is where you physically make one call (by whatever technology calls are made) while you consciously thought you made another call. A "brainfart", where temporarily logic departs you, may be "not what you ever intended to do", but is not an unintended call within the laws of bridge. If the player knew at the time of putting the pass card down that it was the pass card, then it is not an unintended call. We should remember that pass cards are frequently unintendedly used for stop cards, alerts and doubles. But otherwise it is rather unlikely that pass was an unintended call in place of a bid - but not impossible.