Replacing insufficient conventional bid

[jules101]

EW were playing 15-17 NT, 5 card majors better minor, and their auction started thus....

 

 

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1d2cdp]133|100[/hv]

 

East now bids 2♣ (interesting that software doesn't allow this!)

 

 

TD was called.

 

South elected not to accept the 2♣ bid.

 

What restrictions are there now on East?

 

If East bids 3♥ or 3♠ presumably West is now silenced, and the auction ends (unless NS bid on).

 

So may East replace his conventional 2♣ bid with a conventional 3♣ multi purpose forcing bid thus allowing West to chose the denomination of the contract?

[mycroft]

• was 2♣ the call the player was trying to make, or is this a slip of the fingers? (Note: "I was trying to bid sufficiently" is not an unintended call, just a mistake).
  
• what was 2♣ intended as?
  
• what would 3♣ be in this auction?
  
• are there any calls in their system (besides a penalty double) that would show what was intended to be shown?

Answer those questions and find out if there is a legal call that will allow the auction to continue without restrictions (save L25D, don't worry about that unless you're the TD).

 

Please note, the only person that can legally ask and analyze those questions correctly is the TD.

 

The quick version of Law 25:

• If what appeared on the table was not what you were pulling, make it right.
  
• otherwise, if you were clearly making a natural bid, and the cheapest sufficient bid in that suit is *also* clearly natural, you can make that call without barring partner.
  
• otherwise, if there is a call that would show the same hand type or a more specific hand type, you can make that without barring partner.
  
• if none of the above situations apply, or you choose any other call (including pass, but you may not double unless that's the "same or more specific hand type" above) then partner must pass throughout the auction, and lead penalties will apply if your side defends and you fail to show what you were showing with the insufficient bid in the legal auction.

 

In all cases, the only restriction on *East* is that unless double shows the same *conventional* meaning as 2♣, she may not double. West has all the restrictions, depending on what East does.

 

Going into speculation mode, my guess would be, without asking all the questions, that 2♣ was meant to show a second suit in response to the double, and there's no way to show clubs in the auction legally, and East has no restrictions (barring double), but West is passing throughout. Alternatively, 2♣ was meant to be a cuebid, showing a very strong hand (likely, but not guaranteed to be, in support of a yet unspecified major), and East didn't realize that 2♣ wasn't enough. If that's the case, then there will likely be a "Huge hand" call available, and East can take that. If not (say in this auction 3♣ says "bid 3NT if you have a club stopper, we have no major fit"), then the partnership may still be stuck.

[gordontd]

In all cases, the only restriction on *East* is that unless double shows the same *conventional* meaning as 2♣, she may not double.

Law 19 might be invoked if she tries to double to show the same meaning as 2♣

[RMB1]

If the insufficient 2♣ was intended as natural, and is replaced by Pass, does Law 27B1(b) apply?

That is, if the auction becomes 1D(2C)X(P)P(bid) can doubler bid again.

[mycroft]

Law 19 might be invoked if she tries to double do show the same meaning as 2♣

Argh, had a different auction in mind.