An Interesting situation

[ibraves]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj6543hkj765dq2cq&w=sakthat8dk43ca872&n=sq2h43daj9876ck43&e=s987hq92dt5cjt965&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sd2dp2hppp]399|300[/hv]

 

South deals, North doesnt realize this and puts the stop card on the table and reaches for his bidding cards. He gets informed that it is not his bid before putting any cards on the table. The director is called and informs the players that there is no penalty. South then opens this monstrosity and NS end up in 2H+1 for a very good score

 

Has there been any use of UI? South can be fairly sure that N was intending to preempt (much more likely than a strong bid) and as such doesnt need to fear partner game forcing on a total misfit

 

PS South claims he would always open that hand and is not a beginner

[Lord Molyb]

my partner regularly opens 9-counts with good distribution as part of our precision and "kamikaze" weak NT system and he wouldn't consider opening the south hand. Just my input.

[campboy]

It's not obvious to me what is suggested by the UI. The fact that partner is weak might suggest bidding, but the fact that we are unlikely to have a fit (assuming he was thinking of pre-empting in a minor) might suggest passing.

 

I am curious as to why North passed (rather than giving preference to spades), but don't suppose it affects the ruling.

[JLOGIC]

It's not obvious to me what is suggested by the UI. The fact that partner is weak might suggest bidding, but the fact that we are unlikely to have a fit (assuming he was thinking of pre-empting in a minor) might suggest passing.

 

 

The fact that partner is planning to preempt makes it a good time to psyche, we will not be buried by partner say bidding slam with a 19 count, and they might well have a game if partner has a preemptive hand in which case opening will make it much harder for them to bid it. They certainly make a partscore in something if partner has a preempt so even if we drift off a few NV it won't be bad. The UI certainly makes opening the south hand much more attractive and profitable, lower risk and higher reward.

 

It is the same reason one might open this hand in 3rd seat, it is a tactical bid that has much lower downside when partner is known to not have an opening bid. Being able to pretend like we are third seat and bid accordingly because we know partner has a weak hand seems like utilizing UI.

 

Let's put it this way, let's say north had said out loud "I have a weak hand that I will open 2D or 3m or 2/3M" and south opened 1S with a horrible 9 count non vul. You would rule no foul? That is effectively what happened.

[aguahombre]

I am curious as to why North passed (rather than giving preference to spades), but don't suppose it affects the ruling.

Are you suggesting perhaps more is going on between N/S than the OP mentions? If so, you seem justified.

 

North, an allegedly unpassed hand, has made a freebid with considerably more strength than he has shown over the t/o double. The 2H rebid is wide ranging; and anyone reasonably competent would keep the auction alive with 2-2 in Opener's two suits unless they knew something they shouldn't know.

[JLOGIC]

Are you suggesting perhaps more is going on between N/S than the OP mentions? If so, you seem justified.

 

North, an allegedly unpassed hand, has made a freebid with considerably more strength than he has shown over the t/o double. The 2H rebid is wide ranging; and anyone reasonably competent would keep the auction alive with 2-2 in Opener's two suits unless they knew something they shouldn't know.

 

Meh, most likely explanation is that north is not competent. And I mean tbh I cannot imagine anyone who knows what they're doing opening 1S after partner pulls the stop card out of turn. It must be less than .1 % they are cheating somehow, if they were then north would still probably bid 2S if his partner showed a 5-5 horrible hand given Qx and xx.

 

But it doesn't really matter, IMO the UI demonstrably suggests opening the south hand, and passing the south hand is a logical alternative. The rest of it is just random speculation.

[campboy]

Let's put it this way, let's say north had said out loud "I have a weak hand that I will open 2D or 3m or 2/3M" and south opened 1S with a horrible 9 count non vul. You would rule no foul? That is effectively what happened.

As I said, it's not clear to me. So I would consult/poll and be happy to be convinced that bidding is demonstrably suggested. I just have a nagging feeling if he had passed a similar hand that most would open then someone could say "he passed because he knew he wouldn't miss game and the hand was likely to be a misfit".

[Cyberyeti]

As I said, it's not clear to me. So I would consult/poll and be happy to be convinced that bidding is demonstrably suggested. I just have a nagging feeling if he had passed a similar hand that most would open then someone could say "he passed because he knew he wouldn't miss game and the hand was likely to be a misfit".

 

An argument of "I might open this hand, I felt constrained to open it with the UI as it looked like pass was favoured" I wouldn't disagree with. However, odd things are happening, this is not an opening bid even to me who opens anything like one, and no preference to 2♠

[iviehoff]

The director is called and informs the players that there is no penalty.

One can argue that this is director error. Whilst what he said was true as far as it went, it was incomplete: he should have directed south to the unauthorised information.

[billw55]

An opening pass from south is so obviously an LA that a poll is hardly necessary. So I think 1♠ should be rolled back. What happens next is not certain, but a start of 1♣-2♦-p-p seems reasonable. Then what? I suppose the most likely rulings would be 2♦N= or 3♣W-1.

[Cyberyeti]

Another oddity, surely if the south hand is a 1♠ opener, the N hand is a 1♦ opener, so why was he reaching for the stop card :)

[ggwhiz]

Another oddity, surely if the south hand is a 1♠ opener, the N hand is a 1♦ opener, so why was he reaching for the stop card :)

 

Exactly and 50 lashes for south for the most self serving explanation, playing the Director for a fool. 100 lashes to the Director for south being correct.

[barmar]

One can argue that this is director error. Whilst what he said was true as far as it went, it was incomplete: he should have directed south to the unauthorised information.

While directors should remind players of things like this, it seems like it should be obvious enough that the player doesn't get a pass if he fails to do so.

 

I assume no one considers the possibility that the UI doesn't necessarily indicate a weak hand -- North could have been planning on opening 2♣ (assuming this is their strong opening). Obviously that's practically ruled out when West doubles, but South doesn't know that when he chooses to open.