What is going on

[Zelandakh]

yes it is alertable

And if 3♠ was a cue bid agreeing hearts - also alertable?

 

I asked: "Wanted to reach 6♥"

Is this not a direct admission of using UI? He is not meant to know that partner has hearts. This answer about 5NT seem pretty evasive if given to a TD question. Why did he think it was best?! That brings us back to "Wanted to reach 6♥."

[campboy]

Is this not a direct admission of using UI? He is not meant to know that partner has hearts. This answer about 5NT seem pretty evasive if given to a TD question. Why did he think it was best?! That brings us back to "Wanted to reach 6♥."

What UI does he have? It might be an admission of fielding a misbid though, I suppose.

[Zelandakh]

If he knew at the time of bidding 5NT that he wanted to reach 6♥ then he almost certainly picked that up from a reaction by partner, hence UI. The implausible alternative would be that he deliberately gave MI for no reason whatsoever.

[Sjoerds]

If he knew at the time of bidding 5NT that he wanted to reach 6♥ then he almost certainly picked that up from a reaction by partner, hence UI. The implausible alternative would be that he deliberately gave MI for no reason whatsoever.

 

That is exactly my point.

Everything is this bidding tells me that there has been UI from E to W en visa versa.

The alert on 3♥ .... was info for west that his bid wasn't understand

The non-alert on 3♠... was info for east that something might go wrong

 

But did they use that UI?

is 4NT a try to stop in 4NT because west didn't bid 4♣?

aren't 4♣ blackwood, 4♦ (cue)or even 4♠ LA's for west?

 

isn't 5NT a two way bid. "If something is wrong partner, you can pass or else bid your slam"

And isn't 5♠ "4 Aces" a LA for east?

 

Perhaps they would have stumbled into 6♥ and made that contract....but this sequence smells and I am looking for a way to handle this.

I have sympathy for NS claiming a spade contract. 3 is ridiculous of course and after 4♣ this pair would bid 4NT. Is 5♠ a LA now?

And after 5♠ as the LA on 4NT isn't "pass" a LA?

And why wouldn't east continue to 6♠ or 6NT when one of these LA's is chosen?

 

And there is more to think about.

There was MI over the ♠ holding and when south leads with a small spade 6NT goes down!

 

Or do we leave the score on this board and have a word with EW?

[cherdano]

Maybe I don't know enough about medium club level players.

Maybe what I wrote sounded more inflammatory than I had intended it to be.

 

Let me phrase it a bit differently: I have several times played with partners (better than medium club level) where on an auction like this, I couldn't help noticing from their demeanour what had happened, and I had to be very careful not to take advantage of it.

[iviehoff]

Now that the typo is fixed, we can say that this claim by NS is absurd.

That one is. But there are other reasonable UI complaints about EW's bidding, which it is the director's duty to examine even on not being led to the right complaint by NS. Further, if S failed to find a spade lead because he was misled by the explanation of the auction, he also has a complaint. Though N has to unblock the SK to take 5N down on that lead, which might not be assured at this level of play. If there was a correction of explanations at the end of the auction, etc, and S still failed to find a spade lead, then he isn't going to find one against 6N either.