Adjustment ?

[Cyberyeti]

The precise hands are largely irrelevant, S has a balanced 16 with 5 clubs, N has a 3433 6 count.

 

The auction proceeded with E as dealer:

 

2♦(weak)-X-P-2♥(slow)-P-2N-P-3N

 

3N makes and cannot be beaten.

 

N was asked before the lead what X followed by 2N showed and said it was 18-19 (not corrected by declarer). It also emerged that a direct 2N would have been 2 suited. Their agreement is unclear, we felt that if the holder of the 6 count was right and it did show 18-19, then the 16 count was taking advantage of the BIT.

 

We didn't ask for a ruling in a match played privately as we won it anyway.

 

What do people reckon ?

[mjj29]

2♦(weak)-X-P-2♥(slow)-P-2N-P-3N

Do NS play lebensol in that situation? If so it's a lot less clear what the UI shows there.

[gordontd]

What does a slow 2♥ show? My guess is either a 2.5♥ bid, a three card heart suit in a weak hand, or a hand that was considering passing out the double.

[Cyberyeti]

What does a slow 2♥ show? My guess is either a 2.5♥ bid, a three card heart suit in a weak hand, or a hand that was considering passing out the double.

 

Do NS play lebensol in that situation? If so it's a lot less clear what the UI shows there.

 

2N would have been natural, that was the other bid he said he was considering.

[hotShot]

To me it's not obvious what a slow 2♥ would suggest.

[aguahombre]

So, North bid slowly what he should have bid in tempo ---2H in resp to a 2-level takeout double, with the same six HCP the doubler already assumes in these situations.

 

If a direct 2NT is really a two-suiter, then 18-19 for double, then 2NT, is unworkable. So, the doubler overbid and got lucky. Was he supposed to pass 2H when he had a 2NT bid the first time and a flawed system?

 

The exact hands are irrelevent, but we don't even know if the doubler had 3 hearts.

In any case, the slow 2H had nothing to do with advancer's holding and nothing to do with the result.

[Cyberyeti]

So, North bid slowly what he should have bid in tempo ---2H in resp to a 2-level takeout double, with the same six HCP the doubler already assumes in these situations.

 

If a direct 2NT is really a two-suiter, then 18-19 for double, then 2NT, is unworkable. So, the doubler overbid and got lucky. Was he supposed to pass 2H when he had a 2NT bid the first time and a flawed system?

 

The exact hands are irrelevent, but we don't even know if the doubler had 3 hearts.

In any case, the slow 2H had nothing to do with advancer's holding and nothing to do with the result.

He didn't have 3 hearts, was 3235.

[aguahombre]

So, North bid slowly what he should have bid in tempo ---2H in resp to a 2-level takeout double, with the same six HCP the doubler already assumes in these situations. 

 

If a direct 2NT is really a two-suiter, then 18-19 for double, then 2NT, is unworkable.  So, the doubler overbid and got lucky. Was he supposed to pass 2H when he had a 2NT bid the first time and a flawed system? 

 

The exact hands are irrelevent, but we don't even know if the doubler had 3 hearts.

In any case, the slow 2H had nothing to do with advancer's holding and nothing to do with the result.

He didn't have 3 hearts, was 3235.

then, the doubler had already left himself no other options than to rebid 2NT regardless of the slowness or fastness or whatever. Result stands. There is no offending side, but someone should advise the declarer and his partner to plug up the holes in their system unless they play the cards like Meckwell.

[Cyberyeti]

So, North bid slowly what he should have bid in tempo ---2H in resp to a 2-level takeout double, with the same six HCP the doubler already assumes in these situations. 

 

If a direct 2NT is really a two-suiter, then 18-19 for double, then 2NT, is unworkable.  So, the doubler overbid and got lucky. Was he supposed to pass 2H when he had a 2NT bid the first time and a flawed system? 

 

The exact hands are irrelevent, but we don't even know if the doubler had 3 hearts.

In any case, the slow 2H had nothing to do with advancer's holding and nothing to do with the result.

He didn't have 3 hearts, was 3235.

then, the doubler had already left himself no other options than to rebid 2NT regardless of the slowness or fastness or whatever. Result stands. There is no offending side, but someone should advise the declarer and his partner to plug up the holes in their system unless they play the cards like Meckwell.

No need to play like meckwell, just have all 3 finesses work on every board ...

[bluejak]

This sounds a bit like poor players in action. My experience, when playing against me, is that someone with 16 points will always bid again after doubling, and his partner will always turn up with the extra points necessary to make. So pass is not an LA ..........

[Pict]

If opponents bid badly and make a low percentage contract, I don't see the role of the TD.

[Cyberyeti]

If opponents bid badly and make a low percentage contract, I don't see the role of the TD.

My point was that dummy said the 2N bid was 18-19, his partner who was about to declare and should have corrected the explanation if it was wrong didn't, so we assumed it was correct. Oppos I believe were experienced players (certainly their team mates were) and should have known the proprieties of correcting the explanation if it wasn't right.

 

Declarer then turns out to be 2-3 points light of this opposite a hesitation that to me at the time felt like he wanted to bid something more serious, so it seemed reasonable to ask the question.

 

As it happened, this was board 1 of the match, had I seen some of the other stuff that went on in the match (weirdness not any ethical issues), it would have surprised me less.

 

Example: favourable

 

xxx, Axxxx, J, Axxx

 

Partner opens 3♦-X-P-3N-P-P-?

 

The man bid 4♦, we doubled and he found his partner with Q109 to 8 and out, for -300 and a big gain.