correcting misinformation

[mjswinona]

This actually happened in today's club game. How do you rule?

 

1. RHO opens 1NT, you bid 2 clubs. Partner explains this shows both majors and bids 2 spades. RHO passes and partner then says, “I erred, 2 clubs shows a single suit.” Holding 3 spades are you allowed to bid 3 diamonds?

 

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, “I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor,” and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

[pran]

This actually happened in today's club game. How do you rule?

 

1. RHO opens 1NT, you bid 2 clubs. Partner explains this shows both majors and bids 2 spades. RHO passes and partner then says, I erred, 2 clubs shows a single suit. Holding 3 spades are you allowed to bid 3 diamonds?

 

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor, and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

1: Use Law 21B1{a}:

RHO may change his pass to some other call, and thereafter you should choose your call as if partner had given the correct explanation before bidding 2 spades. Law 16B may apply.

2: Use Law 21B1{a}:

Assuming LHO has not yet called in this turn then RHO may change his double to some other call. If he does then you may change your 4 clubs bid (and must do so if 4 clubs is now insufficient).

Next use Law 20F4:

If TD finds that partner has become aware of his mistaken explanation from extraneous information then Law 16B may be applicable, otherwise the 4 hearts bid is fully legitimate.

[aguahombre]

In the second case, at the point where 3S was doubled, I have the authorized information that I showed a heart/minor 2-suiter and that partner could assume it is hearts and clubs.

 

In spite of this, partner bid 3S. How can bidding 4C be legitimate? Whether 4C woke partner up or not becomes moot. We are back to 3SX, and plenty of issues from there. But, at least I would not be part of the problem, as is the case if I bid 4C.

[Trinidad]

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, “I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor,” and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

Why would I bid 4♣ if partner was not interested in my minor but wanted to play in spades? The only reason to bid 4♣ is the UI that partner misunderstood my bid. Therefore, I am barred from bidding 4♣ (unless my hand looks like a 0508 distribution).

 

Rik

[pran]

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor, and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

In the second case, at the point where 3S was doubled, I have the authorized information that I showed a heart/minor 2-suiter and that partner could assume it is hearts and clubs.

 

In spite of this, partner bid 3S. How can bidding 4C be legitimate? Whether 4C woke partner up or not becomes moot. We are back to 3SX, and plenty of issues from there. But, at least I would not be part of the problem, as is the case if I bid 4C.

You are supposed to bid as if partner never said anything about holding both majors but only explained your bid (correctly) as holding hearts and a minor, and then bid 3S.

 

If (according to your partnership understanding) 3S in this situation essentially means "forget about your suits, we play in my suit: Spades" then I agree 4C is not legitimate, and PASS should probably be the only permissible call by you.

 

However, in that case partner is not restrained by unauthorized information and is perfectly permitted to "correct" to 4C or 4H if/when he becomes aware of his own mistake.

[aguahombre]

 

However, (if 3sX is passed), partner is not restrained by unauthorized information and is perfectly permitted to "correct" to 4C or 4H if/when he becomes aware of his own mistake.

 

There would be many issues in that case. I don't believe it is that simple. Some might be:

 

At whose turn did he "discover" his own mistake? His, or his RHO's? Did some extranseous information (from pard or opps) jar his memory? Does the bidding possibly revert? Is there new UI to the 2-suit bidder about partner's spade/club/heart holdings which might influence continations or defense (if opps) decide to declare)?

[pran]

There would be many issues in that case. I don't believe it is that simple. Some might be:

 

At whose turn did he "discover" his own mistake? His, or his RHO's? Did some extranseous information (from pard or opps) jar his memory? Does the bidding possibly revert? Is there new UI to the 2-suit bidder about partner's spade/club/heart holdings which might influence continations or defense (if opps) decide to declare)?

True,

but I make my comments based on the actual facts presented, not on what might possibly (or probably) be revealed during further investigation.

 

This is also why I emphasized the importance of using Law 21B1{a} as the first step in each of the two cases presented in OP (implying that TD must have been called as specified in Law 20F4). Much depends on whether the relevant opponent has been given the choice to change his call.

[mrdct]

This actually happened in today's club game. How do you rule?

 

1. RHO opens 1NT, you bid 2 clubs. Partner explains this shows both majors and bids 2 spades. RHO passes and partner then says, “I erred, 2 clubs shows a single suit.” Holding 3 spades are you allowed to bid 3 diamonds?

 

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, “I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor,” and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

1. I assume 2♠ is pass/correct implying a willingness to play at the 3-level if your suit isn't ♠, so you should just proceed as if that's what partner has shown, with or without RHO changing his call if allowed to by the TD. Your partner's initial misexplnation of 2♣ is UI and you are not privy to the fact that his 2♠ bid was simply preferencing to ♠. Assuming you hold a single-suiter with ♦ and partner has said "I want to compete at least to the three level if your suit is not ♠" I can't think of any alternative but to bid 3♦ unless you had overcalled particularly light or on a particularly poor suit.

 

2. It would be useful to see the full hand, but the UI you have demonstrably suggests some action over the double where pass seems a logical alternative so I'd be winding this back to whatever result emerges from 3♠x on that basis alone (although if it happens to be cold or a good save I'd look at other remedies for the NOS). As for the 4♥ bid by your partner, it's kind of moot but it looks like he got a wake-up call from either or both of the double and the 4♣ bid which are both AI so I think 4♥ would probably be OK. It's one of those situations where the "what would've happened with screens?" or "what would've happen if no explanations were sought or given?" tests are possibly applicable.

 

I think you need to play something less complex over the opponents' 1NT with this particular partner :)

[iviehoff]

You are supposed to bid as if partner never said anything about holding both majors but only explained your bid (correctly) as holding hearts and a minor, and then bid 3S.

Actually, even this may not be enough to protect you from a score adjustment. You must not only bid as if you never heard what partner said, further, to the extent you have choices in that situation, you must bend over backwards to make the choice that makes it clear you never heard it.

[pran]

Actually, even this may not be enough to protect you from a score adjustment. You must not only bid as if you never heard what partner said, further, to the extent you have choices in that situation, you must bend over backwards to make the choice that makes it clear you never heard it.

In my system a 2♥ opening bid shows a weak hand with exactly 5 hearts and at least 4 cards in a minor suit. If my partner responds with 2NT he asks for the minor suit.

 

If he has a memory lapse and explains my 2♥ bid as a traditional weak hand with 6+ hearts and then bids 2NT, do I now have any alternative to continue bidding according to my agreements regardless of what the 2NT bid and the incorrect explanation to opponents might suggest?

[mjswinona]

Here is hand 1.

1.South Deals

Both Vul

 

♠ 10 5 4

♥ 9 3 2

♦ 10 9 4

♣ J 10 7 5

♠ K 7 6 ♠ A 9 3 2

♥ J 6 5 ♥ 8 7 4

♦ A K J 8 5 3 ♦ 7 6

♣ 9 ♣ A K 6 3

 

♠ Q J 8

♥ A K Q 10

♦ Q 2

♣ Q 8 4 2

[mjswinona]

Here is hand 2. I am west in both hands 1 and 2. (Yes, my partner should have bid 3NT instead of doubling 3 spades)

 

2.East Deals

E-W Vul

[hv=pc=n&s=sqhj98654d7ca8642&w=s43h73daqj6432cqt&n=sj87652haqd985cj7&e=sakt9hkt2dktck953]399|300[/hv]

[bluejak]

This actually happened in today's club game. How do you rule?

 

1. RHO opens 1NT, you bid 2 clubs. Partner explains this shows both majors and bids 2 spades. RHO passes and partner then says, “I erred, 2 clubs shows a single suit.” Holding 3 spades are you allowed to bid 3 diamonds?

No, certainly not. Presumably 2♠ over 2♣ shows he wants to play there whatever your suit. With the hand you have 4♠ looks normal - and if you bid 3♦ I shall adjust it to 4♠. You cannot bid on partner's explanations.

 

2. RHO bids 1NT, you bid 2 hearts. Partner explains this as holding both majors. After 3rd seat bids 3 diamonds, partner bids 3 spades, holding 6 spades. RHO doubles and you bid 4 clubs, holding a singleton queen of spades. Partner says, “I erred, 2 hearts shows hearts and a minor,” and then bids 4 hearts with 2 card support. Is this legitimate?

No, certainly not. Presumably 3♠ over 3♦ shows he wants to play there whatever South's minor. With the hand South has pass looks normal - and if South bid 4♣ I shall adjust it to 3♠ doubled. South cannot bid on partner's explanations.

[blackshoe]

I agree with David. I should point out that in both cases, when your opponent corrects his misexplanation he should do so in the director's presence, and the director should inform you of your UI obligations before you choose your call.