misbid artificial strong opening

[mrdct]

This appeal comes from an imp-scored teams event without screens. All four players are of reasonable club-standard but lack experience in higher-level competition.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa765hj986dakca42&w=skj3ht2dqj8ct9875&n=sqt2hk743d7ckqj63&e=s984haq5dt965432c&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=2dp2hppp]399|300[/hv]

 

2♦ was alerted by West and, upon enquiry prior to South's initial pass, described as "24-25hcp".

2♥ was alerted by East, but no explanation was sought until after East's pass with the description given of "negative less than 7hcp no interest in slam".

 

The table result was 2♥W-4 for NS +200.

 

East-West had two hand-written ABF Simple System Cards (the shorter version that doesn't include responses to first round openings) at the table, both of which had "24-25 points" recorded against 2♦.

 

East-West also play weak twos in the majors and represented to the TD that the auction 2♥:2♠ is by agreement non-forcing in their methods.

 

The TD applied Law 21B1(b) as he was not persuaded by the System Card and representations by East-West as to their agreements and therefore decided to treat the case as a misexplanation rather than a misbid. The TD went on to apply Law 21B3 and issued an adjusted score of 4♥S= for NS +620 taking the view that the defence available to defeat the contract was most unlikely to be found in practice at the table.

 

East-West appealled on the basis that they believe they would've defeated 4♥ and the awarding of a vulnerable game to North-South in an auction clouded by an innocent misbid, not misexplantion, was unfair and unreasonable. East-West further maintained that their completed ABF Simple System Card was more than ample evidence that 2♦ was a mistaken call not a misexplanation.

 

The Appeals Committee agreed that this was not a misexplanation, but believed that East had unlawfully taken advantage of the UI from West's alert and explanation of 2♦ in passing 2♥ with 3♥ being a clear logical alternative holding a void and AQx support for partner's apparently natural and non-forcing 2♥ call.

 

The Appeals Committee also considered whether or not South's pass of 2♥ in the balancing position was a SEWoG under Law 12C1(b). South maintained that he felt that with West and North holding yarboroughs it was still plausible for East to have the strong hand. The AC felt that when 2♥ came back to South it was obvious that East did not hold 24-25hcp and it was borderline "wild or gambling" to pass knowing LHO is <7hcp and RHO is a weak two in ♦; however having regard to South's relative inexperience and the confusion caused by the mistaken call, the AC decided that the damage ought not be attributed to a SEWoG.

 

The Appeals Committee considered whether or not there had been a breach of ABF System Regulation 9.6 which prohibits the psyching of a conventional bid which is unequivocally forcing and systematically indicative of the strongest possible opening hand. The AC was satisfied that East did not open 2♦ with the intent to deceive her opponents and the call could therefore not be considered psychic.

 

The Appeals Committee concluded that had East called 3♥, East-West would have finished in 4♥ undoubled and awarded an adjusted score of NS+300. In addition, the AC fined the offending team 1VP for flagrant use of UI.

 

Do you think the Appeals Committee got this right?

[pran]

Do you think the Appeals Committe got this right?

Since you ask: I (for one) think so, yes.

[Cyberyeti]

No I don't, if I'm south, and the auction goes 2♦-2♥-3♥-4♥ I'm doubling this every day of the week.

[jallerton]

Do you think the Appeals Committee got this right?

The AC has considered most of the issues. I much prefer the AC's ruling to the TD's. My only quibble is that there are other possible legal auctions that do not end up in 4♥ undoubled. Firstly, opposite 24-25 points, West might go beyond 4♥. Secondly, South might well double a contract of 4♥ or higher. If weighted scores are permitted in Australia, I think this would be a good time for one.

[bluejak]

The general approach of the AC was good, better than the TD's who forgot that East had UI. But I cannot believe that any result is 90%+ certain on this board so there should be a weighted score.

[mrdct]

There was some some brief consideration by the AC of giving a weighted ruling, but it was thought that if South did double 4♥, East would be off the hook to run to 5♦ which, when doubled, yields the same result as 4♥ undoubled. The AC also had some time constraints as the decision was holding-up the prize giving, most people had a 1-2 hour drive to get home and the venue's staff wanted to clear the room for another function.

[pran]

There was some some brief consideration by the AC of giving a weighted ruling, but it was thought that if South did double 4♥, East would be off the hook to run to 5♦ which, when doubled, yields the same result as 4♥ undoubled. The AC also had some time constraints as the decision was holding-up the prize giving, most people had a 1-2 hour drive to get home and the venue's staff wanted to clear the room for another function.

Fair enough for me! :)

[bluejak]

In general, it is quicker to give weighted scores than single scores because with single scores you have to be much more certain you have it exactly right.

[RMB1]

There was some some brief consideration by the AC of giving a weighted ruling, but it was thought that if South did double 4♥, East would be off the hook to run to 5♦ which, when doubled, yields the same result as 4♥ undoubled.

 

I find it strange that the AC think East would be "off the hook" to run to 5♦. On the presumed auction 2♦-2♥-3♥-4♥-P-(X)-P-(P)-?: I know many might bid 5♦ but surely it is worth considering passing and some would Pass, so Pass is a logical alternative and East would have to Pass.

 

 

The AC also had some time constraints as the decision was holding-up the prize giving, most people had a 1-2 hour drive to get home and the venue's staff wanted to clear the room for another function.

 

Why couldn't the AC and the people waiting the result adjourn to the bar?

[Vampyr]

The Appeals Committee considered whether or not there had been a breach of ABF System Regulation 9.6 which prohibits the psyching of a conventional bid which is unequivocally forcing and systematically indicative of the strongest possible opening hand. The AC was satisfied that East did not open 2♦ with the intent to deceive her opponents and the call could therefore not be considered psychic.

 

I do not like regulations that require mind-reading. Why not treat a misbid as a psych? Not doing so is illogical and is also a license to cheat.

[pran]

I do not like regulations that require mind-reading. Why not treat a misbid as a psych? Not doing so is illogical and is also a license to cheat.

By definition a misbid is accidental while a psych is deliberate.

It is a favour (or privilege) to have a misbid accepted (by the director) as a psych, the most apparent consequence is that the player will normally become aware of his misbid from UI (partner's explanation) while the fact that he has psyched is AI to him all the time.

[barmar]

Firstly, opposite 24-25 points, West might go beyond 4♥.

When he bid 2♥, he said he wasn't interested in slam.

 

I don't understand why people think the auction would go 2♦-2♥-3♥-4♥ absent the UI. Why would West raise ♥ with only a doubleton? I think he'd probably bid 3NT (if he'd expressed slam interest, he might bid 4♣). But that's also down around 4.

[Vampyr]

By definition a misbid is accidental while a psych is deliberate.

It is a favour (or privilege) to have a misbid accepted (by the director) as a psych, the most apparent consequence is that the player will normally become aware of his misbid from UI (partner's explanation) while the fact that he has psyched is AI to him all the time.

 

I didn't mean that a misbid should be treated as a psych by the misbidding side. Of course there are UI considerations. I meant insofar as psychs are regulated or prohibited.

 

If a psych in a particular situation is prohibited, there must be a (however misguided) reason for it. The regulating body should not deny whatever redress is applicable on the basis that the player claims it was a misbid instead.

[pran]

By definition a misbid is accidental while a psych is deliberate.

It is a favour (or privilege) to have a misbid accepted (by the director) as a psych, the most apparent consequence is that the player will normally become aware of his misbid from UI (partner's explanation) while the fact that he has psyched is AI to him all the time.

I didn't mean that a misbid should be treated as a psych by the misbidding side. Of course there are UI considerations. I meant insofar as psychs are regulated or prohibited.

 

If a psych in a particular situation is prohibited, there must be a (however misguided) reason for it. The regulating body should not deny whatever redress is applicable on the basis that the player claims it was a misbid instead.

There can be relevant reasons for giving NOS redress in a case of misbid where the same call as a psyche is illegal by regulation, but then the redress should only apply against OS if the misbid is deemed "not excusable" (i.e. it is treated like an illegal psyche even though it was accidental or inadvertent).

[Cyberyeti]

When he bid 2♥, he said he wasn't interested in slam.

 

I don't understand why people think the auction would go 2♦-2♥-3♥-4♥ absent the UI. Why would West raise ♥ with only a doubleton? I think he'd probably bid 3NT (if he'd expressed slam interest, he might bid 4♣). But that's also down around 4.

Depends how many hearts you think 3♥ shows. I'd also like to know whether in fact the opener shows 24-25 or whether some unbalanced hands of equivalent playing strength with a lower point count are also bid this way.

 

Thinking about it further, I would definitely consider bidding 4♥ direct over 2♦-2♥.

[aguahombre]

 

Why couldn't the AC and the people waiting the result adjourn to the bar?

That would be good prior to their 1-2 hour drive home.

[jallerton]

When he bid 2♥, he said he wasn't interested in slam.

 

I don't understand why people think the auction would go 2♦-2♥-3♥-4♥ absent the UI. Why would West raise ♥ with only a doubleton? I think he'd probably bid 3NT (if he'd expressed slam interest, he might bid 4♣). But that's also down around 4.

 

I don't understand why anyone would expect East to pass with 3-card heart support and a void after the auction 2♦-2♥-3♥-3NT.

[helene_t]

4♥X-6=1400, I think this is clear enough that I see no reason for a weighted score.

[ahydra]

If their methods "say" (i.e. deduced from the similar auction 2H-2S) that 2H is NF, why should East have to bid at all? Facing a 2H opener West would bid 2S with something like J109xxxx - xxx xxx, no? In a similar vein, if West had a hand with spades interested in game, he would bid 2NT or something I assume.

 

That is to say, East is entitled to play West for a rubbish hand and shouldn't have a 3H bid forced upon him in the notional auction. After all, the general rule is "once you pre-empt don't bid again". Yes the opps haven't bid but my understanding is that this is irrelevant - they may well have miscounted or taken a view.

 

East has already done a fair amount to avoid using the UI by not bidding 3D - he settles for the 3-2 fit... I think the ruling is a bit harsh, particularly the 1 VP fine.

 

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

If their methods "say" (i.e. deduced from the similar auction 2H-2S) that 2H is NF, why should East have to bid at all? Facing a 2H opener West would bid 2S with something like J109xxxx - xxx xxx, no? In a similar vein, if West had a hand with spades interested in game, he would bid 2NT or something I assume.

 

That is to say, East is entitled to play West for a rubbish hand and shouldn't have a 3H bid forced upon him in the notional auction. After all, the general rule is "once you pre-empt don't bid again". Yes the opps haven't bid but my understanding is that this is irrelevant - they may well have miscounted or taken a view.

 

East has already done a fair amount to avoid using the UI by not bidding 3D - he settles for the 3-2 fit... I think the ruling is a bit harsh, particularly the 1 VP fine.

 

ahydra

Non forcing does not mean that you bid it on that sort of hand, we play non forcing change of suit, but it's highly encouraging, you don't pass that often, and certainly don't pass with a void and AQx. Ax, KJ109xx, xx, Axx or slightly better would be the sort of hand I'd expect for a NF 2♥.

[Vampyr]

That would be good prior to their 1-2 hour drive home.

 

It is not really relevant how far the players and AC have to drive. The players have a right to an appeal, and this must be carried out according to the procedures in the NBO's regulations. If the AC do not have time to give due consideration for their decision directly after the event, the appeal must be scheduled for a different time.

[aguahombre]

It is not really relevant how far the players and AC have to drive. The players have a right to an appeal, and this must be carried out according to the procedures in the NBO's regulations. If the AC do not have time to give due consideration for their decision directly after the event, the appeal must be scheduled for a different time.

Thank you for clearing that up. I was referring to going to the bar to wait for the ruling, then driving home --a practice frowned upon in some places.

[blackshoe]

It may surprise you to know that some people can spend time in a bar without drinking alcohol. ;)

[aguahombre]

Yeh? Never tried that.

[mrdct]

If their methods "say" (i.e. deduced from the similar auction 2H-2S) that 2H is NF, why should East have to bid at all? Facing a 2H opener West would bid 2S with something like J109xxxx - xxx xxx, no? In a similar vein, if West had a hand with spades interested in game, he would bid 2NT or something I assume.

 

That is to say, East is entitled to play West for a rubbish hand and shouldn't have a 3H bid forced upon him in the notional auction. After all, the general rule is "once you pre-empt don't bid again". Yes the opps haven't bid but my understanding is that this is irrelevant - they may well have miscounted or taken a view.

 

East has already done a fair amount to avoid using the UI by not bidding 3D - he settles for the 3-2 fit... I think the ruling is a bit harsh, particularly the 1 VP fine.

 

ahydra

Most people I know play mandatory courtesy raises with 3-card support after a non-forcing change of suit and in this case with AQx support, a void, undisclosed extra length in ♦ and green vs red, I couldn't imagine any remotely sensible bridge player not raising to 3♥ or 4♥.