What action do you take?

[Cascade]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj83ha83datcaq83&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=2d(Standard%20Multi)p2n(Enquiry)p3c(Good%20weak%20two%20in%20hearts)p4hp4sp]133|200[/hv]

 

This auction has never occured before so there is no agreement about 4♠.

 

What do you do now?

 

What alternatives do you consider?

[gwnn]

It's rather difficult to answer this - perhaps you could try the slam missing lovers forum?

 

Anyway if this had occurred at the table this can't be anything other than "sorry partner I fudged up the system" or perhaps "you'll be sorry partner for fudging up the system". We signed off and he bid 4♠ after showing a maximum hand with hearts already so he can't have an in-system 4♠ bid.

 

I pass. Maybe partner's 4♠ bid will be disallowed, but that's not my problem.

[Hanoi5]

Is thinking your partner made a mistake an alternative?

 

It's hard to take 4♠ as something other than a mistake:

 

- 4♠ besides the 6 hearts?

- Spade cue-bid looking for a slam?

 

Maybe 4NT is the best alternative. Pass might be too much, I wouldn't accept it as LA, especially if it was suggested by something at the table.

[gwnn]

Hanoi, you're contradicting yourself. You say that it's hard to take 4♠ as something other than a mistake. That would mean that you're struggling to find a Logical Alternative to pass. Then you say that you wouldn't accept pass as a logical alternative?

 

The laws say that if you have more than one logical alternative, then you should choose the one that is not suggested by any unauthorised information that you may possess. Cascade came here and asked us: which are your logical alternatives? I think what you're trying to say is that 4NT is a LA? I don't see why it would be, but ok..

[WellSpyder]

This auction has never occured before so there is no agreement about 4♠.

I'm not surprised!

 

What do you do now?

I curse partner for giving me an impossible problem! But I probably pass, for the reasons gwnn states.

 

What alternatives do you consider?

4N or 5♣, I guess. Partner might just be trying to tell me he has a really good hand for hearts which perhaps he regrets opening with a multi, with a spade void? If he has 6 solid hearts other than the A, plus a side K there may well be a play for slam. But I think the practical choice is to pass and apologise if partner was being too clever for me.

[RMB1]

What do I do: Pass.

What else do I consider: nothing.

 

When partner opened 2♦ and I looked at my hand, it was vanishingly unlikely that partner had a strong option for his "standard multi". So I assume partner has a weak two in a major and one of us has got the subsequent auction wrong. I do not consider playing partner for a strong option.

[mrdct]

Are we allowed to know what NS's methods are? Would 3♥ have been forcing?

[bluejak]

I pass. WTP?

[Hanoi5]

That's right Csaba, and that's why I asked at the beginning if thinking partner made a mistake was a LA.

 

4♠ is either a mistake or one of the two things I mentioned. If imagining partner made a mistake is a possibility then it's ok, but bidding on is also a possibility and then pass shouldn't be accepted, I think.

[paulg]

My initial reaction was 6♠. Without any UI it seems that partner has probably pulled 3♣ instead of 3♦ out of the bidding box (okay this is less likely with written bidding) and I am inclined to look for a slam. Bidding it directly is probably too much so I think I'd bid 5C.

 

A lot would depend on the range of the multi. If JEC ever plays multi, then looking for a grand slam is reasonable.

[P_Marlowe]

What do I don now? - Leave the table?

 

What alternatives you are considering? - Shoot p?

 

I hope this does not occur in a serious event.

 

The options are, p messed up the response, he has a weak two in spades,

this is only an option, if multi got added lately.

 

If I am playing long enough with my p, to be sure, that he knowes the

meaning of 3C - ok ..., I guess I am bidding 5H, passing 5S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

My initial reaction was 6♠. Without any UI it seems that partner has probably pulled 3♣ instead of 3♦ out of the bidding box (okay this is less likely with written bidding) and I am inclined to look for a slam. Bidding it directly is probably too much so I think I'd bid 5C.

 

A lot would depend on the range of the multi. If JEC ever plays multi, then looking for a grand slam is reasonable.

3♣ instead of 3♦ is one of two options the way I looked at it, we used to play that 2♦-2♠-3♣ had strong/weak options so partner might have either had a brain fade at this point or mis-seen the 2N bid.

 

Did I have 3♦ available over 3 ♣ to ask how good a weak 2 partner had ?

 

Does partner habitually weak 2 x, KQxxxx, x, Kxxxx ? and in hearts agreed auctions, is 4♠ ace asking for us ?

 

If my weak 2s are sound and I had 3♦ available to ask how good a good weak 2 it was (therefore showed more by bidding game regardless), and play 4♠ ace asking, I will give my ace ask response.

[1eyedjack]

5N "Pick a slam" (and hopefully not GSF!). With a bit of luck we will go one or two off in our trump fit instead of about 6 off opposite a void. And on a good day it might actually make.

[pooltuna]

Q1. Because I play with a lot of pickups I pass. It is clear this particular partner has an unclear understanding of what making partner Captain entails (trying to be nice here) so I assume he forgot the agreement for 3S.

 

Q2. Not too many as I find a firing squad is usually adequate.

[Jeremy69A]

I pass. WTP?

 

I guess it is possible that partner has pulled the wrong card or in a drunken moment I agreed something else obscure but if you pass 4♠ and it is a long term partner I think you are making an error. A bucket of trust is about to disappear. I would bid 5♣ and accept that I maybe about to make it even worse.

[gordontd]

I guess it is possible that partner has pulled the wrong card or in a drunken moment I agreed something else obscure but if you pass 4♠ and it is a long term partner I think you are making an error. A bucket of trust is about to disappear.

Didn't the trust start to ebb away at the moment partner made the impossible 4♠ bid? I'd pass too - I'd prefer to believe that one of us got the system wrong than that partner has no understanding of captaincy.

[Phil]

I think its relevant to ask if screens are in use.

[gwnn]

Honestly, even if partner had said "no partner!! I have spades!" and bid 4♠, I would still pass. I see nothing even in the same hemisphere as a logical alternative. That said, in this case I wouldn't be upset if the TD ruled against us :)

[Cascade]

I think its relevant to ask if screens are in use.

 

No Screens.

[Cascade]

Are we allowed to know what NS's methods are? Would 3♥ have been forcing?

 

No.

 

Curiously I was involved in an UI situation last weekend with a different pair involving that exact auction.

 

2♦ 2NT

3♣ 3♥ slow

4♥

 

The director wound that back.

[ahydra]

Isn't the ethical thing to do to play according to what system you believe you're playing - so here you have to take 4S as a cue bid, partner having a supermax eg x KQJxxx Kxxx xx. In which case 6H seems the sensible bid.

 

I might be wrong but this is the impression I've got from other threads.

 

ahydra

[Cascade]

Some more information.

 

Written bidding was used.

 

The pair are a long time partnership who have many times represented the region at the National Interprovincial Championships.

 

South claims she has never seen north cue-bid in this auction.

 

North's 4♠ bid was made with special emphasis - with haste move forward write the bid and move back.

 

I was sitting east and it was obvious to me that north was correcting an error.

[piratepete]

Unfortunately this looks plausibly enough like RKCB for ♥ in my system, so answering the question is probably a LA. Then again, the distributional constraints for a weak-two in our multi are fairly broad, so maybe that's what it is, relying on 2NT to hold enough high-card strength to sustain 5/6♥.

[gwnn]

Isn't the ethical thing to do to play according to what system you believe you're playing - so here you have to take 4S as a cue bid, partner having a supermax eg x KQJxxx Kxxx xx. In which case 6H seems the sensible bid.

 

I might be wrong but this is the impression I've got from other threads.

 

ahydra

Sure, it's the ethical thing to do, but this 4♠ bid is just impossible. 90% of the time partner was never trying for slam, but was merely interested in our range (i.e. wanted to stop low opposite a minimum) or suit (wanted to stop low opposite spades). I think it's completely absurd to bid 4♠ even on x AKQxxx Kxx xxx, or whatever you think is a maximum weak 2.

 

Contrast this with another common guest:

 

1NT-4♥*

4♠-.....oops eek 5♥

p

 

in this case pass from the 1NT bidder is completely illegal (by the way, it is also a very bad decision and insulting to partner).

[Cascade]

Anything is ethical if there is no UI.

 

If there is UI then bidding may not only be unethical it maybe illegal.

 

The question is how "impossible" is "impossible"?

 

It seems to me that there are two possibilities for 4♠:

 

1. Whoops I forgot the system

 

2. I have something extremely unusual for my 2♦ opening and I have for whatever reason decided to make a further move.

 

To determine the logical alternatives we need to make some judgement about the relative likelihoods of these two possibilities.

 

The partnership in question say they have never cue-bid on this auction. However they also admit they have never forgotten the system.

 

Based on this it is difficult to know what the relative probabilities are. Unless you believe the relative probability of cue-bid is much lower than that of a mistake when there is UI suggesting a mistake the player in receipt of the UI is legally not just ethically bound to treat the bid as a cue-bid.

 

The situation was complicated in that south denied noticing the tempo and mannerisms of the 4♠ bid. To me this is self-serving - although one could argue that the claim of UI is also self-serving. North also was not sure that she had bid out of tempo. However when I asked her how many players at the tournament having realized that they misbid would have, in their eagerness to fix things, up made the correction with their normal tempo and she said "probably none".