Simple one?

[Simplicity]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=shajt943dk642c732&w=saqj86hq8dqj753c5&e=s74hk7652da98ckj4&s=skt9532hdtcaqt986]399|300|Scoring: MP

1♠-3♥-X-AP[/hv]

 

As North made his final pass, West said something along the lines of: "Oh my partner's double was for penalties. It can't be anything else, I probably should have alerted it shouldn't I?" Penalties is indeed the partnership understanding.

 

North agrees, TD is called and North has no desire to change his call.

 

Result 3♥X-3 NS -800.

 

NS claim damage as South would bid 4♣ over an alerted double. How would you rule?

[pran]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=shajt943dk642c732&w=saqj86hq8dqj753c5&e=s74hk7652da98ckj4&s=skt9532hdtcaqt986]399|300|Scoring: MP

1♠-3♥-X-AP[/hv]

 

As North made his final pass, West said something along the lines of: "Oh my partner's double was for penalties. It can't be anything else, I probably should have alerted it shouldn't I?" Penalties is indeed the partnership understanding.

 

North agrees, TD is called and North has no desire to change his call.

 

Result 3♥X-3 NS -800.

 

NS claim damage as South would bid 4♣ over an alerted double. How would you rule?

4♣X-2 NS -500 ?

[Fluffy]

deleted, nonsense.

[bluejak]

Some sort of adjustment. Whether 100% of allowing 4♣ I am less sure.

 

But the important thing is that the moment that West complains about the adjustment you tell him "You said 'I probably should have alerted it' and now you know why". :P

[LH2650]

I must respect the vulnerability much more than this pair, because I would not consider pulling the double. However, assuming you adjust to a contract of 4♣, doubled or not, assigning a result seems to be quite a challenge. If you led the ♦ Queen, and it held, would you find the best continuation at the table? I wouldn't. If the defense goes wrong at trick 2, would you, as declarer, take the double dummy number of tricks? I doubt that I would.

[bluejak]

That is why it is easier to adjust using Law 12C1C than 12C1E: you do not have to do intricate analysis: just guestimate a few possibilities and a rough likelihood, and give a weighted score adjustment for various numbers of tricks.

 

:o

 

Question for those who understand basic English: my spellchekka wanted to change 'guestimate' into 'guesstimate'. Do you think this right?

[paulg]

Question for those who understand basic English: my spellchekka wanted to change 'guestimate' into 'guesstimate'.  Do you think this right?

Both are permitted in UK competitive Scrabble, but only guesstimate in America, Canada, Israel and some others. It seems that guestimate is in the Collins English Dictionary.

[dburn]

Question for those who understand basic English: my spellchekka wanted to change 'guestimate' into 'guesstimate'.  Do you think this right?

Both are permitted in UK competitive Scrabble, but only guesstimate in America, Canada, Israel and some others. It seems that guestimate is in the Collins English Dictionary.

The OED gives "guesstimate" as the usual spelling, but "guestimate" as an alternative. It appends the notation "orig. US", which is lexicographese for "not really a word at all, but we'd better include it or they might nuke the Bodleian".

[iviehoff]

The OED gives "guesstimate" as the usual spelling, but "guestimate" as an alternative. It appends the notation "orig. US", which is lexicographese for "not really a word at all, but we'd better include it or they might nuke the Bodleian".

Good. "Guestimate" looks like it ought to mean a lodger who moved into your bed.