Gerben42 Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 [hv=pc=n&s=st9852ht2daj43c83&w=sjhj43dkt98caqjt9&n=sakq73h9765dq75ck&e=s64hakq8d62c76542&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1sp3s4c4s5c5sppp]399|300[/hv] Regional pairs tournament in Germany. 3♠ was not alerted, however a weak jump to 3♠ would be alertable. EW (expert pair) claim they would have doubled 5♠ if they had known that South can be weak. Normally a clear case. However NS are an intermediate pair who think ODR is probably some rock band. South explains: "I have 5 HCP, 2 points for the 9th trump, 2 points for the 10th trump and two doubletons for 1 point each, that's 11 in total, so that's an invitation". If NS really think the south hand is equivalent to e.g. Axx Kxx Axxx xxx (more in line with what EW were expecting), is this still an adjustment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 Would a mixed raise, say 7-9 HCPs if 4432, be alertable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 Would a mixed raise, say 7-9 HCPs if 4432, be alertable?Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 If NS really think the south hand is equivalent to e.g. Axx Kxx Axxx xxx (more in line with what EW were expecting), is this still an adjustment? It does not matter much what they think. If the non-alertable meaning is "a high-card raise to 3", well, this is not what they have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 It does not matter much what they think. If the non-alertable meaning is "a high-card raise to 3", well, this is not what they have.The regulations say the bid must be alerted if it is of less than invitational strength. They do not define what constitutes invitational strength. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenG Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 Their agreement seems to be the a raise to 3♠ is invitational. Therefore there was no reason to alert. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 The regulations say the bid must be alerted if it is of less than invitational strength. They do not define what constitutes invitational strength. Well, it sounds like the trouble is with the regulations. Pairs are seemingly allowed to define invitational strength however they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 Well, it sounds like the trouble is with the regulations. Pairs are seemingly allowed to define invitational strength however they want.Not a problem at all. I wouldn't want to regulate someone's judgement. If South thinks his hand his worth a game invite to 4S, it doesn't matter how silly that is. The agreement is that he was inviting game; next case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akwoo Posted May 18, 2015 Report Share Posted May 18, 2015 I'm not sure I buy the EW claim that they would've doubled 5♠. Certainly they would've doubled 5♠ if 3♠ was definitely weak. But doubling 5♠ when 3♠ could either be a normal invite or a distributional 'invite' like this one is a good deal more dubious. A score of 5♠-1 is probably already pretty good, so I would think you need a 70% chance of setting to actually double. 1) Was director called when dummy came down, or after the hand? 2) How well did 5♠-1 score? As to whether MI occurred, it depends on whether there was an implicit agreement or not. Does North think South would normally invite on that hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted May 18, 2015 Report Share Posted May 18, 2015 Not a problem at all. I wouldn't want to regulate someone's judgement. If South thinks his hand his worth a game invite to 4S, it doesn't matter how silly that is. The agreement is that he was inviting game; next case? Yes, this is fine. The question in the OP, though, is whether the bid is alertable. I think that the regulators intended it to be, but were not specific enough in writing the regulation. They have left it up to each pair to define "invitational". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted May 18, 2015 Report Share Posted May 18, 2015 Yes, this is fine. The question in the OP, though, is whether the bid is alertable. I think that the regulators intended it to be, but were not specific enough in writing the regulation. They have left it up to each pair to define "invitational"."Alert""Please explain""Partner's raise is inviting game, but his judgement about what hands should invite game is poor." Come on --- if they knew enough to alert that, they would know enough not to invite game with that hand. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarletv Posted May 18, 2015 Report Share Posted May 18, 2015 2) How well did 5♠-1 score?4♠-1 39 %5♠-2 68 %5♠X -2 96 % Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted May 18, 2015 Report Share Posted May 18, 2015 South's judgement is really not an issue here. All that matters is what the NS agreement is. If they play that 3♠ is invitational, then it's not alertable. I suppose if South has a habit of "upgrading" hands like this to invitational strength, that could create an implicit agreement that needs to be disclosed. But if they're weak players, I'm not sure you can expect them to pick up on trends like this. 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.