UI on asking about an artificial bid

[fromageGB]

NS on a normal F2F club night have no convention cards on display. North opens the bidding with 2♥, alerted. Local regulations are such that this could be a weak 2 in any suit, amongst other things.

 

East has a hand that is a clear-cut takeout double of a weak 2 in spades, and an equally clear-cut initial pass if it is a weak 2 in hearts. He asks what the bid means, explained as a weak hand with 5 hearts and 4 of a minor. He passes.

 

South passes.

 

West makes a re-opening double, not showing anything specific.

 

North passes, East passes for penalty, South bids 2♠, West doubles for penalty

North bids 3♦, East doubles for penalty, South bids 3♥, West passes

Noth passes, East doubles again for penalty, passed out.

 

NS get a disastrous score, and ask for an adjustment to 2♥ undoubled, because West had UI from East's question.

 

* * *

 

Is there UI? The meaning of the opening bid was completely unknown and East needed to know what it was. Surely there is "I" but not "UI". ???

 

If this is UI, it gives complete freedom to any pair to invent an artificial opening bid, and not suffer any consequences when it goes wrong, but to gain the advantage when it does not.

[paulg]

Do local regulations allow me to give NS a slap?

[Kungsgeten]

I would say yes, there is some UI. However NS should have a convention card, and if they'd had such EW would be able to look at their methods. Now EW has to ask, and by doing so possibly give partner UI (since perhaps you do not ask if you don't have a plan to bid something). Another fact is that you are allowed to ask about your opponents' bids, and in any situation when doing so you might give some UI.

 

The only way they'd get to play 2♥ undoubled is if west's double was made with an unreasonable hand. One way of determining this is to ask other players what they would have done with west's cards in the same situation, where they are informed on what the 2♥ opening meant.

[barmar]

We need to see West's hand. UI is only an issue if West had multiple LAs, and the action he took was demonstrably suggested by the UI. If he has a clear-cut double, then the UI is irrelevant.

[blackshoe]

Do local regulations allow me to give NS a slap?

Only if your name is George S. Patton. B-)

[mycroft]

Well, sure there is UI. Of course, the UI is "the opponents made what is very likely a conventional preempt, and I'd better know what it is so I have a clue".

 

This same North would have a gripe when the auction went 2♥!-contented, after suitable pause and no question, pass-pass-pass and West's hand was the same, but "of course used the fact that partner didn't care about what 2♥ meant when deciding not to balance - and anything he does besides pass is 500 at least." So, what is poor East supposed to do?

 

Now, I could always investigate, decide whether pass was an LA to double, and all the rest, and then fine N/S a full board penalty for not following CC regulations that required E/W to provide the UI N/S then nailed them for. I would offer the same deal to them if they were the traditional ACBL "CC cushion" or "it's in my purse" players, and then complained that East asking for the CC passed the same UI.

[fromageGB]

I would say yes, there is some UI. However NS should have a convention card, and if they'd had such EW would be able to look at their methods.

So a follow-up question. Is it UI if East looks at the convention card (if there is one) after the opening bid?

 

If not, why not?

[fromageGB]

We need to see West's hand. UI is only an issue if West had multiple LAs, and the action he took was demonstrably suggested by the UI. If he has a clear-cut double, then the UI is irrelevant.

This is the West hand

[hv=pc=n&w=skqj4h72d42ckj975]133|100[/hv]

It seems like a pretty normal reopening double to me, when it seems the points are about evenly split.

[ggwhiz]

Local regulations are such that this could be a weak 2 in any suit, amongst other things.

 

How on earth is East supposed to bid his hand without knowing if the bid is this, that or something else?

 

Under these (ahem) unusual CoC it should be mandatory to ask and not doing so should be the cause of UI.

[barmar]

How on earth is East supposed to bid his hand without knowing if the bid is this, that or something else?

Players successfully bid over Multi and Polish Club, which both show any of several different hand types.

[Lanor Fow]

If the player always asks about an alerted stop bid (which I do in direct seat as I'm meant to be considering my call for 10 seconds, and how can I do that without knowing what it is) then there is no UI.

 

If, however, the player doesn't always ask then there is UI. I would expect this to be the most common situation.

[StevenG]

If, however, the player doesn't always ask then there is UI. I would expect this to be the most common situation.

I would expect my partners only to ask if they don't know what the bid means. If partner only asks when the meaning of the bid is unknown, and I understand their knowledge base (which I normally do, so I know they don't know) and the auction is one that is competitive or likely to become so, is there really any UI? (I'm talking about any bids, not just stop bids.)

[mycroft]

Without asking/knowing what the Alert means, barmar?

 

More seriously, 2♦ Alert. Sure, it could - likely is - Multi w/ or w/o strong options, or it could be an EHAA 2♦ opener. So, do you have a defence to 2♦ hearts or spades or diamonds, except that responder knows which suit(s) it can't be and your partner doesn't?

 

I, too would assume that passing without asking would be *much* more UI-generating than asking, given that 2♥ could be EHAA hearts, or Muiderberg Hearts-and (and the "and" could be different if it could include spades or not), or spades, or spades-or-minors, or even "rounds or pointeds", or...

[fromageGB]

Players successfully bid over Multi and Polish Club, which both show any of several different hand types.

There is a huge difference here, as mycroft indicated. I bet these players you mention know that the opening is a Polish club, or whatever.

 

If the opening bid is completely unknown as to content, how can it give UI to ask what it is?

 

Let me also repeat my second question : does your interpretation of the rules tell you that UI is given when you look at the opponent's convention card (if they had one) ?

 

Finally, I have given the hand of the West player who made the reopening double. Would you say this is based upon UI?

[Vampyr]

How on earth is East supposed to bid his hand without knowing if the bid is this, that or something else?

 

Under these (ahem) unusual CoC it should be mandatory to ask and not doing so should be the cause of UI.

 

A 2♥ bid as a preempt in any suit including hearts is not allowed at level 4, but some tournaments and most clubs have looser system restrictions.

[Lanor Fow]

I would expect my partners only to ask if they don't know what the bid means. If partner only asks when the meaning of the bid is unknown, and I understand their knowledge base (which I normally do, so I know they don't know) and the auction is one that is competitive or likely to become so, is there really any UI? (I'm talking about any bids, not just stop bids.)

 

If they always ask when they don't know, then there is no UI, but it might be difficult to convince a director of that (especially if playing against a pair who have seen your partner not ask about alerted bids already in the round).

 

If they only ask if they don't know and the auction is competitive, or might become so, then there is judgement involved, which is likely to be partly based on their hand. In this case, there is UI passed.

[StevenG]

It seems to me, then, is that the only purpose of alerting is to laugh at your opponents and tell them "You're stuffed!". If you don't ask, you don't know what's going on, and make mistakes. If you do ask, you risk an adjustment against you. Hardly in the spirit of full disclosure, is it?

[Trinidad]

Players successfully bid over Multi and Polish Club, which both show any of several different hand types.

I read the OP differently. (And I may be wrong.)

 

I understood that the 2♥ bid was not a Multi type bid. The CoC were such that the 2♥ opening was allowed to show any specific weak two, i.e. in a known suit, but not necessarily in hearts. In addition, both a natural weak two in hearts and a weak two in a specific other suit were alertable. The OP needed to ask about the 2♥ bid because he wanted to know whether it was a weak two in hearts, or whether it was a weak two in some other (but known) suit.

 

Rik

[barmar]

Without asking/knowing what the Alert means, barmar?

I misunderstood the intent of ggwhiz's post. I thought he was wondering how East was supposed to deal with a bid that could be "weak 2 in any suit". I forgot that the context of the thread is about whether East should be allowed to ask about the alert, not what to do after getting the explanation.

[barmar]

What about a player who passed in the first round of bidding, and then asks?

 

Normally, you would expect that a passed hand would have little to think about. So just passing would convey little information. But asking suggests that there's something unusual about the hand that he originally passed -- maybe it's a maximum pass, or has shape that would take action depending on the meaning of the bid?

[mycroft]

I would expect that in this case, the answer is "whether I need to Alert partner's 2♠ when it gets around to him, oh, and know what it means, too"; possibly with a fillip of "Well, if *I* don't have a problem with 2♥ whatever it means, that passes UI (but the AI of 'I passed first time' probably makes that moot); but now partner will have the problem of 'I want to bid if...', and now they'll nail *him* for passing UI" and just a smidgeon of "we'll finesse against the hand that asked, because he has the points. But if there's a UI case, we'll get that too!"

 

I have been accused of being paranoid. I also know players who it is worth being paranoid about.

[blackshoe]

I have been accused of being paranoid. I also know players who it is worth being paranoid about.

As "Harold Finch" said on "Person of Interest" last night, you're not paranoid if they really are after you.

 

My favorite quote on this though, is the anti-submarine warfare ship skipper who said "Of course I'm paranoid! The question is whether I'm paranoid enough".

[fromageGB]

I should clarify. Let me put it more clearly in a Poll - see new topic

[Vampyr]

In addition, both a natural weak two in hearts and a weak two in a specific other suit were alertable.

 

Natural bids are announced. But Lucas-type bids, which can be considered a variety of weak 2 in hearts, are alerted.