sasioc Posted May 9, 2013 Report Share Posted May 9, 2013 (edited) The auction went[hv=d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1d(Nat%20or%2011-13%20%5Bbal%2C%20no%205cM%5D)1hd(Deny%204S)p1n2dd2hpp2nppp]133|100[/hv]On one side of the screen S alerted their 2D bid (screening with W) and, when asked, said "undiscussed". W was 2344 and intended 2nt as scrambling. On the other side of the screen there was no alert of 2D. x of 2D was taken as takeout in context and 2nt as natural in context by E because he understood 2D to be natural or natural-esque. It later emerged that if 1D had shown 3 cards or more the 2D would have shown 4S6H, which neither of EW volunteered during the auction. After 2NT had been passed by E, N now suggested that 2D was "maybe natural or maybe spades and hearts". Table result: 2nt-1 with 3D one off DD, practically certain to make in practice (required unusual, DD lead and switch) Edit: this was in a teams event held in Germany but attended by teams from several countries. I believe we were in EBL land. I am, however, interested in what might happen in other places. Do you rule? Does it matter what, if anything, E asked N about 2D? Should 2D have been alerted on either side? Edited May 10, 2013 by barmar Added hand diagram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jallerton Posted May 9, 2013 Report Share Posted May 9, 2013 Under German/EBL rules, is a player supposed to alert in "no agreement" situations? If not, then arguably South has not committed an infraction, whilst North's alert did not cause any damage because he followed it up with an accurate description of his (lack of) agreement. A more complete explantion would be "no agreement over TriBal but over if 1♦ had been natural it would have meant ........." but this does seem to be the sort of situation where E/W ought to be aware that the bid might well not be natural and should be able to protect themselves by asking if they want to know what 2♦ means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted May 11, 2013 Report Share Posted May 11, 2013 I'm not clear what MI there has been, assuming that (as seems likely) they haven't discussed their defence against a natural-or-balanced 1D opening.North gave East some additional information, after his pass, but in time for East to change his call if he wanted to. If East, given the extra information that there was no agreement, it was either natural or the majors, wanted to change his mind, then he could have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.