Hesitation and bid (from partner)

[aguahombre]

East is quite right to alert, as per OB 5B10. What confuses me is how this can be an accurate description of anyone's agreements. People normally discuss "responses to 1M openings", not "responses to 1st or 2nd seat 1M openings".

Let me help you Campboy - OB whatsit.

 

'A player who is not sure whether a call made is alertable, but who is going to act as though it is, should alert the call, as the partnership is likely to be considered to have an agreement, especially if the player’s partner’s actions are also consistent with that agreement.'

 

There is no suggestion that East intended to treat his partner's call as if it showed a raise.

You quote a passage which states East should alert if he intends to act as if 2NT was alertable. Then you say there is no suggestion East intended to do so.

 

The suggestion that he intended to treat 2N as a heart raise was the alert itself in compliance with the passage you quoted.

 

Any suggestion that East was trying to mastermind, or to do anything other than follow the disclosure rules, is way out there in deep left field.

 

Maybe he slopped up the explanation, but I would (after pausing to let it all sink in) conclude that 2N was probably going to be treated as a heart raise.

 

As TD, I would rule that 3S plays, and the result stands. There were two ways for North to show real values and he chose neither of them. Even if 3H is not a discussed bid, double followed by 3S would show values. So, if North had values and they missed game, it is their own fault; and if North didn't have values, they got where they should get. No foul.

[CamHenry]

The consensus seems to be that E's uncertain explanation doesn't help matters, and that North could well have been dithering about what his bids meant. After the dust settled, it turned out that W had indeed intended his 2NT to be a constructive raise: he held ♠Qxx♥AJTx♦Kxxx♣xx. North had three spades to the K, four small hearts, and a balanced 8-count; while 3♠ was makeable double-dummy it didn't make at the table.

 

Those paying extra attention here will note that E did not, in fact, have anything like his opening bid: he had three small hearts and balanced dross, and was playing silly games. After taking +50 on a partscore board, when the result might have been conceding a partscore or defending a game for +100, EW decided not to make a fuss, so the ruling never happened and it's of academic interest.