Confusion

[kenberg]

The auction:

1♣ 1♠ X 2♥

4♥

 

Before we go further, I ask: What do you make of 4♥? You might want to

first know about 2♥. If you click on it, the response will be No Information Available.

 

The setting is an ACBL Imp game if that matters.

 

I was the 4♥ bidder and things did not go well after that. Partner generously took the blame for construing 4♥ as artificial but I am not so sure.

 

The case for bidding 4♥ : This was what I was going to do w/o the 2♥ on my right. If lho is about to bid 4♠ I want partner to know of both my strength and my hearts so he can make an informed decision.

The case against: While I can look at my hand and partner's double and know we have a heart fit, and together with my two spades I can infer, as a good bet anyway, that rho is trying to show some sort of spade raise, partner isn't looking at my four hearts and might well think that the 2♥ bid was real and my bid was, for example, a big hand with great clubs and a stiff heart. He might, might he not? He did.

 

I don't care about this specific hand all that much, but there does seem to be a recurring problem in online play. Rho makes a call, not alerted, not explained, quite possibly they are a pick up pair with few agreements to explain, and I have to choose a call hoping that my interpretation of what's up matches my partner's. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

 

Being an acbl game, it costs money (not much), pays masterpoints (fractions), and has a director (maybe paid but not a lot), so I suppose I should have summoned him. But still, what does he do if, as is likely, the players have never discussed the auction? And what should I have done with the hand? When I bid 4♥ I thought it was clear but as I thought about it later I was less certain.

 

I am not giving you the hand because I don't want to get sidetracked on whether you agree with my evaluation that it was worth 4♥. That's a different matter altogether.

[ArtK78]

The "No Information Available" response means that your opponent did not answer your request for information. Therefore, you should call the TD. But in a speedball game (you didn't say it was a speedball game, but most of the ACBL games are speedball games) getting the TD involved is very time consuming.

 

Besides, what is he going to answer? That he psyched the 2♥ bid? Presumably, 2♥ is natural, although it may be a psyche under the facts that you presented.

 

Clearly, without the 2♥ bid, your 4♥ bid would be natural. The question is (obviously) - Does it make sense to have 4♥ mean something else over an intervening 2♥ call? And exactly what does it show? The opponents have bid spades naturally and hearts naturally (allegedly). So what can 4♥ show? 2-0-5-6 and a massive hand?

 

The other question is whether you should double 2♥ anytime you were planning to bid hearts naturally at any level.

 

I doubt that this is a sequence that many players have ever faced, much less discussed. I suspect that your expose the psyche meaning for your 4♥ bid is as good an interpretation as any, as you can always cue bid spades with the massive minor 2-suiter or a massive club one-suiter.

 

By the way, I doubt very much that your RHO meant the 2♥ bid as some sort of spade raise. He could have cue-bid clubs to do that, why cue-bid a suit that no one has bid (even if it was implied by the negative double)?

[kenberg]

I just looked up the hand (yes, I should have earlier) Rho had Axxx in hearts. Full hand of xx / Axxx / AJxxx/ xx

 

Lho, the spade bidder, had 4 points. QTxxx and an outside Q. Oh well.

 

 

The hand was a bit weird all around I think, but the problem comes up in various forms

[peachy]

With no information available, I would assume Dbl shows 4-card hearts, 2[H] is a good spade raise ("invisible" cue of the suit the opponent is guaranteed to have), and 4[H] is a good hand to play 4[H] opposite a minimum negative double. If the 2[H] bidder issues a Dbl over my 4[H], at least I know how to play the hearts.

[fromageGB]

Absolutely with peachy. If double shows hearts (not guaranteed!) then 4H is natural regargless of what their bid means.

[aguahombre]

Well, if I had bid 4H, partner would know how unlikely it would be that I would jump-cue in a suit he has probably shown and expect him to think it was a splinter for my own unsupported suit. I don't make up stuff like that at the table during an auction. He should take 4H as to play if he has 4H, but willing to have it removed if he doesn't and wants to remove with some freak Diamond one-suiter or 1-3-5-4 which chose not to bid 2D (and believing the hearts are stacked).

 

With the example 2-0-5-6 hand, I might try some number of diamonds, rather than confuse my CHO. If we assume the 2H call was some type of spade raise, then we have 2S to use for a random cue and good/bad 2NT (a relative of leben)available with club one-suiters, plus 3C (of all things).

[helene_t]

I would have doubled 2♥. Maybe it is intended as a spade raise but if LHO acts on that then they have misinformed you by not explaining 2♥. And if LHO does not jump in spades there is no rush bidding 4♥.

 

That said p should probably still have guessed that 4♥ was meant as natural.

[jjbrr]

Agree with Helene.

 

It stinks that people don't alert or don't know how to alert properly in these games, but what can you do, right?

[aguahombre]

A lot of people are confused about (ACBL) not alerting cue-bids --the part about "invisible" cues, where a suit is shown but not-yet bid. I am one of them. I only alert if the cue before a suit is actually bid shows more specific information than a normal cue would show. That is probably wrong, but I wouldn't claim MI if opponents failed to alert 2H here.

[helene_t]

OK, but even if 2♥ is not alertable then RHO should still provide disclosure once Ken clicked on it.

[ggwhiz]

As your pard, I would assume that 2h was a mis-click.

 

I've used the individual chat arrows to ask opps things (when no response to clicking on the bid) with fine speed and honest responses in speedballs. In fact I've had "mis-click" as the response quite often. Not required but honest.

 

Calling the director takes too much time and I've only called for adjustments in the next round.

[Bbradley62]

I'm puzzled by those who seem convinced that opps are acting badly. Isn't it possible (maybe even likely) that they are a pick-up partnership arranged one minute before gametime from the "players looking for partners" list? If so, "no information available" is exactly the correct response. OP recognizes this by making "quite possibly they are a pick up pair with few agreements to explain" part of his original post. Why are others so quick to vilify the opponents?

 

Okay, maybe "pickup partnership with no information available" is better, but still...

Edited March 24, 2010 by Bbradley62

[jjbrr]

If one makes a "no information available" bid, shouldn't his hand somewhat resemble something or anything that the bid might show?

[ArtK78]

For the benefit of the last two posters, the "No Information Available" response is the response that the system provides when the player chooses to send a blank response. In other words, if you get a question from an opponent about the meaning of a bid and, instead of typing in an explanation and sending it, you don't type in anything but hit "Send", the system provides the "No Information Available" response. "No Information Available" is not the response of the player, it is a default response of the system for a blank response.

[kenrexford]

2♥ is a natural call. How can that be alerted? Disclose when asked, sure.

 

Reminds me...

 

At a Pitssburgh NABC, I overcalled 2♥ after 1minor-P-1♥. The auction ended up:

 

1minor-P-1♥-2♥

3♥-3♠-all pass.

 

Partner ended up declaring the 4-2 trump fit. Four heart ruffs were available, as Responder could not overruff Declarer's ruffs (even if he pitched a heart at some point) and could not overruff dummy, in time. Plus, there was sufficient transportation, and a hook worked. +140 won an IMP.

[jjbrr]

I just looked up the hand (yes, I should have earlier) Rho had Axxx in hearts. Full hand of xx / Axxx / AJxxx/ xx

 

Lho, the spade bidder, had 4 points. QTxxx and an outside Q. Oh well.

 

 

The hand was a bit weird all around I think, but the problem comes up in various forms

For the benefit of the last two posters, the "No Information Available" response is the response that the system provides when the player chooses to send a blank response.  In other words, if you get a question from an opponent about the meaning of a bid and, instead of typing in an explanation and sending it, you don't type in anything but hit "Send", the system provides the "No Information Available" response.  "No Information Available" is not the response of the player, it is a default response of the system for a blank response.

 

I know it's just bad bridge and nothing else, but it feels wrong to me that someone can psyche a bid and then provide no information at all about what it means.

[Bbradley62]

For the benefit of the last two posters, the "No Information Available" response is the response that the system provides when the player chooses to send a blank response. In other words, if you get a question from an opponent about the meaning of a bid and, instead of typing in an explanation and sending it, you don't type in anything but hit "Send", the system provides the "No Information Available" response. "No Information Available" is not the response of the player, it is a default response of the system for a blank response.

Would you feel better if, when asked about a bid for which my partner and I have no agreement, I type the words "no partnership agreement" rather than simply allowing the system to say "no information available"?

[aguahombre]

Well, with the actual hand the 2H bidder had, "no information available" seems about right. I doubt that he or his partner had a clue as to what it meant, and we still don't. :)

[ArtK78]

For the benefit of the last two posters, the "No Information Available" response is the response that the system provides when the player chooses to send a blank response.  In other words, if you get a question from an opponent about the meaning of a bid and, instead of typing in an explanation and sending it, you don't type in anything but hit "Send", the system provides the "No Information Available" response.  "No Information Available" is not the response of the player, it is a default response of the system for a blank response.

Would you feel better if, when asked about a bid for which my partner and I have no agreement, I type the words "no partnership agreement" rather than simply allowing the system to say "no information available"?

No. Provide the partnership agreement. If the call is natural by partnership agreement, then type "natural." How can a simple bid like 2♥ in this auction have no partnership agreement? Presumably it is natural. If it is a cue bid, as some have suggested, then explain it as such. But to respond with a blank explanation is rude.

 

If I inquired as to the meaning of the 2♥ bid and got an answer back as "no partnership agreement" I would consider that to be a nonresponse. A better response would be "undiscussed, but presumed natural."

[straube]

It seems to me that one ought to be able to ask one's opponent what they were intending to show. One can't ask them what there hand is, but think about how it's done with bidding screens...you ask what the bid they make means. Can they really say "We have no agreement as to what my bid means" or do they have to say how they hoped it would be intended?

 

I'm not sure, but I think the latter. If not, you run into the problem where the opponents might or might not have an agreement but might be on the same wavelength and you are in the dark.

 

Say it goes 1D (1H) 1S (P) 4C. No alert. Opponent asks "What's 4C?" and responder says "No agreement" and then proceeds to treat the bid like the splinter that it probably is and bids on to 6S. The opponent doubles and is surprised when their AK of clubs isn't cashing. Responder shouldn't have to say "No agreement, but I'm taking it as 4 spades, good hand and club shortness" and the opponent shouldn't have to be knowledgeable enough to guess that it's a splinter. He ought to be able to ask opener how he hoped his partner would take that bid...whether or not he actually holds that hand.

 

If I'm not allowed to ask, I think dbl, 3H, and 4H all have to be natural and that 3H and 4H tend to show better hearts than does dbl. I think dbl is penalty and doesn't promise 4 or even 3 hearts (I mean, I could be 18-19 bal with Kx of hearts) and that I might actually pass with four small hearts as 2H could be making their way. I could argue against not ever bidding 3H or 4H, but if I have good hearts and a more distributional hand, then I might risk showing partner that I didn't much believe RHO.

[Bbradley62]

For the benefit of the last two posters, the "No Information Available" response is the response that the system provides when the player chooses to send a blank response.  In other words, if you get a question from an opponent about the meaning of a bid and, instead of typing in an explanation and sending it, you don't type in anything but hit "Send", the system provides the "No Information Available" response.  "No Information Available" is not the response of the player, it is a default response of the system for a blank response.

Would you feel better if, when asked about a bid for which my partner and I have no agreement, I type the words "no partnership agreement" rather than simply allowing the system to say "no information available"?

No. Provide the partnership agreement. If the call is natural by partnership agreement, then type "natural." How can a simple bid like 2♥ in this auction have no partnership agreement? Presumably it is natural. If it is a cue bid, as some have suggested, then explain it as such. But to respond with a blank explanation is rude.

 

If I inquired as to the meaning of the 2♥ bid and got an answer back as "no partnership agreement" I would consider that to be a nonresponse. A better response would be "undiscussed, but presumed natural."

Why do you persist in believing that there actually IS an agreement? One minute before gametime, two players from the "partners needed" list agree to play together, agree to play SAYC with 1430RKC and standard carding. Off we go... So, when asked, what should they say is their partnership agreement about this sequence? Last I knew (admittedly 10 years ago) ACBL's rules specifically said you SHOULD NOT say "presumed natural" because you are only supposed to state what has actually been agreed to.

[kenberg]

My own intent here was not to complain about the opponents but rather to take a look at a somewhat recurrent online issue, how to handle weird developments. My lho opponent overcalled a spade on four points, my right hand opponent bid 2H over the negative double holding four hearts and five diamonds. Neither of these are calls I would have made but that's bridge. Here I am with a huge hand and everyone else is in the auction, and bidding our suit.

 

I cannot recall ever bidding 2♥ myself in 4th after 1♣ 1♠ X but I think I agree that it should be hearts. That's different from saying that on this auction and my hand I thought that it was hearts. It sorta was, sorta wasn't. I have no idea what his plan was if over 2H it went X pass pass.

 

Anyway I have 4 hearts and partner has 4 hearts. At least I think that he does and he does. We have more than half the deck and eight hearts, is rho really bidding 2♥ naturally? Unlikely.

 

But partner has less info to go on, and 4♥ may mislead him, as it did.

 

I'm inclined to think that I should have, as Helene and others suggest, started with a double and then bid hearts. It's the old idea of making a bid partner will surely understand rather than a bid that may be a better bid but risks confusion. For all I know the double might have been followed by three passes but, if not, then a later heart bid would, I imagine, have clarified it all.

[jjbrr]

I think double has to show ♥ and 4♥ probably should show ♥ but obv there's potential for disagreement. I'd make the call I'm sure won't be misunderstood, though I would prefer to just bid 4♥ to keep them out a little if partner wouldn't misinterpret it.

[blackshoe]

I know it's just bad bridge and nothing else, but it feels wrong to me that someone can psyche a bid and then provide no information at all about what it means.

A psych is a deliberate departure from partnership agreement. Since the disclosure rules are oriented around explaining those agreements, if a player psychs, and you ask him what his bid means (online — you can't do that f2f unless behind screens) you should expect the explanation to not match the hand. You may not like that — I expect a lot of players don't — but since psychs are legal, you're stuck with it.

 

Before someone suggests creating a regulation that if an opponent asks, when you have psyched, about your call, you must tell him you've psyched, let my say that IMO such a regulation would be illegal, since it effectively makes psyching pointless, and so would contravene Law 40A3.

 

That said, if you ask someone what a call means, you should be told the partnership agreement.

[Bbradley62]

My own intent here was not to complain about the opponents but rather to take a look at a somewhat recurrent online issue, how to handle weird developments. My lho opponent overcalled a spade on four points, my right hand opponent bid 2H over the negative double holding four hearts and five diamonds. Neither of these are calls I would have made but that's bridge. Here I am with a huge hand and everyone else is in the auction, and bidding our suit.

 

I cannot recall ever bidding 2♥ myself in 4th after 1♣ 1♠ X but I think I agree that it should be hearts. That's different from saying that on this auction and my hand I thought that it was hearts. It sorta was, sorta wasn't. I have no idea what his plan was if over 2H it went X pass pass.

 

Anyway I have 4 hearts and partner has 4 hearts. At least I think that he does and he does. We have more than half the deck and eight hearts, is rho really bidding 2♥ naturally? Unlikely.

 

But partner has less info to go on, and 4♥ may mislead him, as it did.

 

I'm inclined to think that I should have, as Helene and others suggest, started with a double and then bid hearts. It's the old idea of making a bid partner will surely understand rather than a bid that may be a better bid but risks confusion. For all I know the double might have been followed by three passes but, if not, then a later heart bid would, I imagine, have clarified it all.

I apologize for my tirade.

 

Is this phenomenon really so different from what you might encounter at a club game at the local Y? Players show up unpaired and agree to play at the last minute, or lower-level players are there for a night out and have not discussed much at all. I wouldn't expect these problems at a Regional Flight A event, but that's not what we're playing here.

 

As for the bids on this hand, as a non-expert I would expect 4♥ to be to play (possibly a 2-suiter, but somewhat undefined) and Dbl of 2♥ to show a good hand with hearts.