Failure to alert Ghestem

[Barry]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s1073h102d107543ck107&w=s952hak83d92cj852&e=saqj864h97654dqc3&s=skhqjdakj86caq964]399|300|[/hv]

 

N pass E pass S 1♦ W Pass

N Pass E 3♣ S Pass W pass

N 3♦ E Pass S Pass W 4♣

N Pass E 4♠ S Pass W pass

 

The 3♣ bid was Ghestem (showing both majors) and it was not alerted.

 

4♠ went one down. South lead the A♣ followed by another club that was trumped by E. This is when the failed alert became apparent.

 

NS claim they have been damaged by the failure of their opponents to alert. What is the damage?

 

However, the traveller turned up another problem. The board was played 7 times with the following results. 6♦ 5♦+1 5♦ 4♠(2) 4♠-1 3♠+2

 

The diamond contracts should not really make because there are three clear losers but because of the cards involved it makes on three occasions. Now should NS be awarded 5♦ making as an adjusted score?

[lamford]

4♠ went one down.

This takes a bit of believing. How on Earth could East lose more than a trump and two minor-suit tricks?

 

Also it does look trivial to beat 5D - were it to be reached. King of hearts (for count), ace of hearts (for suit preference), spade.

 

Did North-South indicate what they would have done differently if 3C had been alerted?

[campboy]

When you say 3♣ was Ghestem, was that really their agreement in protective seat or had East just made a mistake?

 

If "Ghestem" really was the agreed meaning then East is required to inform N/S of the failure to alert before the opening lead is faced.

 

If N/S were aware that 3♣ was not natural then surely North would have passed out 3♣ when he had a chance to do so, and this would go about 5 off.

[lamford]

If N/S were aware that 3♣ was not natural then surely North would have passed out 3♣ when he had a chance to do so, and this would go about 5 off.

Six off I think, with the defence making five clubs and five diamonds. If it had been alerted, then North might have concluded that West had six or seven clubs and might still have bid 3D.

[helene_t]

Is it really correct to adjust under the assumption that the player who forgot the meaning of his partner's call actually alerted it (saying it was ghestem) while at the same time decided to pass it with a hand that would pass only based on having forgotten the agreement?

 

It just feels very artificial to me. Maybe slightly more natural to adjust on the basis of him having said "it might be Ghestem but I am gambling that it is natural".

 

Oh well, we are adjusting to what would have happened if he passed and then a second after he passed, before his LHO made a call, recalled the convention and explained it. And then opps are not entitled to know whether he passed because of having forgotten the convention, or passed because he has long clubs.

[campboy]

Is it really correct to adjust under the assumption that the player who forgot the meaning of his partner's call actually alerted it (saying it was ghestem) while at the same time decided to pass it with a hand that would pass only based on having forgotten the agreement?

It is correct to adjust on the basis of N/S being correctly informed and West still forgetting the agreement, since the MI is an irregularity and the forget is not. After all, if this had happened with screens, or on BBO, East would have ensured North was told what the bid meant, but West would still not have known.

[bluejak]

Is it really correct to adjust under the assumption that the player who forgot the meaning of his partner's call actually alerted it (saying it was ghestem) while at the same time decided to pass it with a hand that would pass only based on having forgotten the agreement?

Yes. Do not think of it as correctly alerted, think of it as the non-offending side as being correctly informed. What would have happened, for example, if each of the four players had been playing in an environment where they have complete information about their opponent's system. Perhaps you could think of it as though they were each playing in different rooms with a computer, and no communicating, but they can call up the meaning of any call by the opponents. That is the basis for adjustment.

[Cyberyeti]

There's something a little odd about this, and I think the NOS could have protected themselves, I cannot conceive of a possible hand where anybody would not open either 1 or 3 clubs and would then jump protect with a natural 3♣. Did the OS have Ghestem on their card ?

 

Also did the diamond contracts make from N or S ? I can see E finding the wrong lead, but not W as often.

[lamford]

There's something a little odd about this, and I think the NOS could have protected themselves <snip>

I don't think that is reasonable for this level of player who was still unaware that something did not add up when East protected with 3C and then bid 4S all on his own. It is not an offence to be clueless, after all.

[bluejak]

It may not be common, but how do you bid a 4117 hand if you believe that pre-empts deny four-card majors? I am always unhappy at posts suggesting hands are impossible because of initial passes because of long experience otherwise. Tonight at Deva BC the bidding went 3D dbl pass pass pass at several tables [the penalty passer had five of them, but the contract usually made]. At our table the 4171 hand passed throughout and I played 3C in the other direction.

[cloa513]

4♠ went one down.

This takes a bit of believing. How on Earth could East lose more than a trump and two minor-suit tricks?

 

Also it does look trivial to beat 5D - were it to be reached. King of hearts (for count), ace of hearts (for suit preference), spade.

 

Did North-South indicate what they would have done differently if 3C had been alerted?

Agreed it takes some doing to go down in 4S and some of the worst play to allow 6D to make. Must be the most skilled field.

Down in 4S

4S finesse then cash from top or 4S finesse then run three hearts, rough out all clubs and underrough.

6D

Cash ♥A and then get worried because of the QH drop then switch to a club seems most likely.

5D

Cash ♥AK then lead another heart for a ruff sluff or a diamond if they manage to finess in clubs or declarer leads to ♠K and defenders put second hand low.

[Cyberyeti]

It may not be common, but how do you bid a 4117 hand if you believe that pre-empts deny four-card majors? I am always unhappy at posts suggesting hands are impossible because of initial passes because of long experience otherwise. Tonight at Deva BC the bidding went 3D dbl pass pass pass at several tables [the penalty passer had five of them, but the contract usually made]. At our table the 4171 hand passed throughout and I played 3C in the other direction.

My point being that either it's a good enough hand to protect with 2♣ or it's a bad enough hand that you want to pass and hope they had 3N on, there is very little in between.

[helene_t]

thanks campboy and bluejak, that makes a lot of sense.

[lamford]

6D

Cash ♥A and then get worried because of the QH drop then switch to a club seems most likely.

I can see people opening 3S on the East hand, South bidding 4NT, North picking 5D and South adding a sixth. Now the singleton club lead lets it through. I think this is why Cyberyeti wanted to know who was playing 6D.

[Cyberyeti]

6D

Cash ♥A and then get  worried because of the QH drop then switch to a club seems most likely.

I can see people opening 3S on the East hand, South bidding 4NT, North picking 5D and South adding a sixth. Now the singleton club lead lets it through. I think this is why Cyberyeti wanted to know who was playing 6D.

Indeed or E might open 2♠ or 1♠, plus S might go off his trolley and after a pass open a revolting benji 2♣ for example.

[peachy]

Whatever the adjustment, if any, NS must not get any part of 5D = or +1 because the auction is evidence that they would not have bid it. North passed the opening bid of 1D. I don't know what to make of the balancing 3D call with no shape, losers in every suit, his only honor card in unfavorable position in front of the "club bidder", and a partner who did pass 3C.

[lamford]

Whatever the adjustment, if any, NS must not get any part of 5D = or +1 because the auction is evidence that they would not have bid it.

I agree with that. If it is IMPs it looks clear to pass out 3C on the North hand; matchpoints might be tougher. Overall I would be inclined to give a pretty high percentage of 3C-6, and maybe some small weighting to other scores.

[jeremy69]

Overall I would be inclined to give a pretty high percentage of 3C-6

 

I agree and also perhaps a GP(Ghestem penalty) for forgetting and sowing confusion.

[Free]

Why on earth would South pass 3♣ if it was alerted? And even if he passed, why on earth would West alert and pass? I don't buy the 3♣-6 story.

[lamford]

Why on earth would South pass 3♣ if it was alerted? And even if he passed, why on earth would West alert and pass? I don't buy the 3♣-6 story.

As bluejak explained, South is entitled to know the true meaning of 3C, and when it is not alerted he will happily pass - double of an unalerted 3C would presumably be takeout of clubs and ridiculous. West thinks it is natural, and will therefore pass, as he did at the table. He is deemed to alert, and North is entitled to full information before his decision whether to pass it out. If North had a convention card in front of him with "3C overcall = Ghestem - two highest ranking suits", what do you think he would do?

 

As I think DALBurn once wrote "Ghestem is a device that allows the tournament director to change -100 into -1100". East-West are fortunate that it is only -300 here.