How would you guys rule this?

[MrAce]

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/interesting-appeal-hand-from-turkish-club-championship/?cj=419268#c419268

[helene_t]

Result stands. I don't believe that the misexplanation makes double more attractive.

[nige1]

IMO the director and committee both ruled correctly. Admittedly, Versace was given a fair description of South's actual hand. Nevertheless...

• If South's 2N is a "limit-bid (max 12 HCP)", then East's lead-directing double is merely speculative.
• If 2N is "forcing", then double would be more dangerous and less attractive.

The East-West defence was sub-optimal but not a serious error/wild/gambling.

[helene_t]

I don't see why it matters if 2nt is forcing or not.

 

If it is not forcing then S has about 11 and N has about 13-18.

 

If it is forcing for one round then S has about 11-15 and N has about 13-16.

 

If it is gf then S has about 13-16 and N has about 11-15.

 

Either way, their combined strength is enough for game, possibly significantly more but neither player made a slam try.

 

Presumably the expected combined NS strength is a bit more in one scenario than in others, but I wouldn't make any assumptions about that without knowing more about their style and system.

[lamford]

My view on this is the same as the TD and 2/3 of the AC.

 

I agree with the ruling. The merit or otherwise of the actual double is irrelevant. If East had been told that 2NT was forcing, he would not have doubled 3NT. And 3NT goes off on any other lead routinely. Law 21B1(b) states:

 

The Director is to presume Mistaken Explanation rather than

Mistaken Call in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

 

Therefore there was a routine and correct adjustment to 3NT-1. It worries me slightly that one member of the AC would consider overturning this. The TD decision was correct, and I would not have remotely considered appealing as NS.

[wank]

are convention cards required in turkey? in many of the places i play they don't exist. i have played in turkey and i didn't have a convention card either and noone commented.

[MrAce]

are convention cards required in turkey? in many of the places i play they don't exist. i have played in turkey and i didn't have a convention card either and noone commented.

 

Not required but not having one means you are playing on your own risk in case ***** happens like this.

[Fluffy]

It is unclear to me if there was MI or not, director should ask more questions.

[sanst]

It is unclear to me if there was MI or not, director should ask more questions.

If the explanatiom is different on both sides of the screen, there is MI.

[sanst]

My first thought was the same as helene_t's. But this East is one of the very best players in the world, none better than he. These have an, in my view, uncanny ability to work out the lay-out of the cards. A single jack can make all the difference. And Versace is so far out off my league that I'm unable to really decide whether his claim is right or false. Anyway, there was MI, so he probably has a point.

[helene_t]

My first thought was the same as helene_t's. But this East is one of the very best players in the world, none better than he. These have an, in my view, uncanny ability to work out the lay-out of the cards. A single jack can make all the difference. And Versace is so far out off my league that I'm unable to really decide whether his claim is right or false. Anyway, there was MI, so he probably has a point.

East's KJxx of hearts are of course better if at least one of the ♥AQ is with north rather than south. So yes, I suppose he has some kind of point. Still, his claim that he wouldn't have doublet with correct explanation is a tad too selfserving for me. I may well be wrong. But I refuse to give him more credit simply because he is Versace. We are all equal for the law.

[weejonnie]

East's KJxx of hearts are of course better if at least one of the ♥AQ is with north rather than south. So yes, I suppose he has some kind of point. Still, his claim that he wouldn't have doublet with correct explanation is a tad too selfserving for me. I may well be wrong. But I refuse to give him more credit simply because he is Versace. We are all equal for the law.

World-class players are like a finely tuned Ferrari - when they have correct input their responses are finely tuned, but equally any grit (MI) in the system and the effects can be disproportionate.

[barmar]

If the explanatiom is different on both sides of the screen, there is MI.

But it's relevant whether the MI was given to the player who took action based on it.

 

I think it's safe to assume that the TD established that Versace was given MI, since otherwise there would be no basis for the ruling or appeal at all.

[sanst]

But I refuse to give him more credit simply because he is Versace. We are all equal for the law.

True as that might be, the Laws of Duplicate Bridge state on a few places that you should take into account the class of player involved.

[blackshoe]

Not in this case.

[wank]

i called the director on him for opening 1NT and backing in with 3D with 3-5 in the reds after a 2H overcall on his left and a slow pass from his client partner. for all the sympathy i got from the director and the appeal person, i might as well have been impugning their belief in their god.

[nige1]

...But I refuse to give him more credit simply because he is Versace. We are all equal for the law.

True as that might be, the Laws of Duplicate Bridge state on a few places that you should take into account the class of player involved.

i called the director on him for opening 1NT and backing in with 3D with 3-5 in the reds after a 2H overcall on his left and a slow pass from his client partner. for all the sympathy i got from the director and the appeal person, i might as well have been impugning their belief in their god.

IMO, the law should take into account the overall standard of the event rather than the reputations of individual players.

 

An international corroborates Wank's experience. He claims that he can reliably predict rulings from the names and nationalities of the players, directors, and committee-members -- The facts of the case are an unnecessary irrelevance. :)

[gordontd]

An international corroborates Wank's experience. He claims that he can reliably predict rulings from the names and nationalities of the players, directors, and committee-members -- The facts of the case are unnecessary and irrelevant. :)

I think a statement like this requires more corroboration than "he claims that he can reliably predict..." In an international event the TD team is international and TDs do not rule without consulting each other.

[MrAce]

I think a statement like this requires more corroboration than "he claims that he can reliably predict..." In an international event the TD team is international and TDs do not rule without consulting each other.

 

 

This TD is also TD in major WBF events.

[nige1]

deleted

[nige1]

I think a statement like this requires more corroboration than "he claims that he can reliably predict..." In an international event the TD team is international and TDs do not rule without consulting each other.

The opinion I quoted was extreme but the perceptions of others can be amusing.

This TD is also TD in major WBF events.

The committee and most commentators seem to agree with his ruling :)

[gordontd]

This TD is also TD in major WBF events.

I was replying to nige1's quotation of another player's claim that players' and TDs' nationalities are significant in determining rulings.

[Fluffy]

But it's relevant whether the MI was given to the player who took action based on it.

 

I think it's safe to assume that the TD established that Versace was given MI, since otherwise there would be no basis for the ruling or appeal at all.

I am glad you are used to this high standard for TDs, but I am not :P

[MrAce]

But it's relevant whether the MI was given to the player who took action based on it.

 

I think it's safe to assume that the TD established that Versace was given MI, since otherwise there would be no basis for the ruling or appeal at all.

 

Yes.

Two different explanations. TD had to figure which of them explained the correct version of their agreement/system to their screen mate. And whether Versace had the correct version of it or not.

If NS pair had a way to prove that the explanation to Versace was the correct one, EW would have no case.

Lack of cc, or any system notes, or lack of another example hand played in same match, made TD to not give benefit of doubt to offending side.

[MrAce]

Result stands. I don't believe that the misexplanation makes double more attractive.

 

This is exactly how I thought what the law cares.

Apparently I was wrong.

According to people who dealt with so many appeal cases like this on screens, the law says E had the right to receive correct explanation of opponent system.

According to them it does not matter that South hand coincidentally matches to the explanation.

They say "Yes, East made a speculative double that we may not make, and the south hand was not something he did not expect, but this is irrelevant because if he received correct information he would not make this double"