NT opening with singleton penalty

[dickiegera]

East cashed AK ♦ gave partner a ruff [partner void] and partner exited with a Trump.

 

Later North led 2 of clubs to the K empty in dummy and West won with Q.

West now tried to cash A of clubs and it got ruffed and North was able to pitch his losing Heart on

dummies K of clubs.

 

 

What should penalty be in this situation?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st86h9532d765ck97&w=s97hqt874dcaqt843&n=sakqj54hak6dqjtc2&e=s32hjdak98432cj65]399|300[/hv][hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2n3dpp3sppp]133|100[/hv]

[pran]

East cashed AK ♦ gave partner a ruff [partner void] and partner exited with a Trump.

 

Later North led 2 of clubs to the K empty in dummy and West won with Q.

West now tried to cash A of clubs and it got ruffed and North was able to pitch his losing Heart on

dummies K of clubs.

 

 

What should penalty be in this situation?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st86h9532d765ck97&w=s97hqt874dcaqt843&n=sakqj54hak6dqjtc2&e=s32hjdak98432cj65]399|300[/hv][hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2n3dpp3sppp]133|100[/hv]

Was there a regulation in force that made opening 2NT with a singleton illegal?

Did N/S have a partnership understanding that North might open 2NT with a singleton?

If so, was this understanding properly disclosed to opponents?

Don't overlook Law 40C1.

[gordontd]

What should penalty be in this situation?

What was the infraction?

[blackshoe]

In answering Gordon's question, please specify the law or regulation violated.

[dickiegera]

In answering Gordon's question, please specify the law or regulation violated.

 

 

It is my understanding that ACBL recently passed a ruling that opening NT with a singleton was illegal unless it was

an Ace ,King or Queen.

 

I want to know what the penalty is for doing so.

[gordontd]

It is my understanding that ACBL recently passed a ruling that opening NT with a singleton was illegal unless it was

an Ace ,King or Queen.

 

I want to know what the penalty is for doing so.

Here's the regulation. It seems to me the first thing would be to investigate whether it was done by agreement.

[FelicityR]

I readily admit I'm no director but if a bid is illegal due to contravening a national association's rules (as opposed to actually making an illegal bid) I would think the best result would be to void any bids that North has made and adjust the score to E/W making 3♦ for 110. Whether that is actually covered in the rules is another matter. The illegality of the bid is on a far higher level than a simple misunderstanding.

[pran]

It is my understanding that ACBL recently passed a ruling that opening NT with a singleton was illegal unless it was

an Ace ,King or Queen.

 

I want to know what the penalty is for doing so.

It would appear to me that the relevant laws in this case might be:

In its discretion the Regulating Authority may designate certain partnership understandings as ‘special partnership understandings’. A special partnership understanding is one whose meaning, in the opinion of the Regulating Authority, may not be readily understood and anticipated by a significant number of players in the tournament.

{The Regulating Authority:} is empowered without restriction to allow, disallow, or allow conditionally, any special partnership understanding.

A side that is damaged as a consequence of its opponents’ failure to provide disclosure of the meaning of a call or play, as these laws require, is entitled to rectification through the award of an adjusted score

When a side is damaged by an opponent’s use of a special partnership understanding that does not comply with the regulations governing the tournament the score shall be adjusted. A side in breach of those regulations may be subject to a procedural penalty

 

However (as already said) never overlook L40C1 which applies unconditionally unless ACBL explicitly has excempted this law in their relevant regulation.

 

Edit: After reading the relevant ACBL regulation (#6 above) it is my understanding that ACBL regulated the valid agreements on NT opening bids but did not invalidate such opening bids when protected by Law 40C1.

 

So the key question here is whether there was a partnership understanding (explicit or implicit) to use the opening bid of 2NT here. If the answer is "no" then there is no legal reason for any reaction.

[hrothgar]

I will note the following:

 

If you want an adjustment to your score, I'd want to understand how you were damaged and whether it was subsequent or consequent to the infraction.

[blackshoe]

As others have said, the answer to OP's question is that it is unclear that there has been an infraction, and so until that question has been resolved there is no basis for a penalty.

[pescetom]

Even in Italy, which has a much less creative RA than ACBL, it seems to me that the 2NT opening in question would be an infraction if bid without alert.

The regulations (which are little more than a translation of the old WBF Systems/Alert policy) say that to be bid without alert a 1NT opening must be within 15 and 18 points and "willing to play in NT" and a 2NT opening must be at least 19 points and "natural".

It's difficult to conceive 6331 as a natural NT opening and the fact that he ran to spades speaks against his will to play in NT.

[ahydra]

Sounds like the only infraction was West leading out of turn after he "beat" the ♣K with the ♣Q and then led the Ace. :)

 

Remind North/South of the rules around opening NT bids with singletons, and record the hand. If they do it again, then refer to whatever the ACBL prescribes as penalty for an illegal agreement. (Of course, if you know this isn't the first time they've violated the system policy then you can throw the book at them now rather than later.)

 

ahydra

[Vampyr]

Opening with a singleton may be very unusual in the ACBL, but the 6-card major seems even more peculiar.

[pran]

Sounds like the only infraction was West leading out of turn after he "beat" the ♣K with the ♣Q and then led the Ace. :)

 

ahydra

Probably an unfortunate misprint in OP.

From the context it is clear that low clubs were played from Dummy in both tricks 1 and 2.

The CK was later available for the discard of a heart loser.

[dickiegera]

Probably an unfortunate misprint in OP.

From the context it is clear that low clubs were played from Dummy in both tricks 1 and 2.

The CK was later available for the discard of a heart loser.

 

Correct ! Around trick 7 or 8

[ahydra]

Opening with a singleton may be very unusual in the ACBL, but the 6-card major seems even more peculiar.

 

The partner I mentioned in the other thread (the one who hovered her hand over what she thought I should be playing from dummy) liked to open pretty much anything in the ~20 point range 2NT. She never could understand why she kept missing slams :/.

 

ahydra

[pescetom]

The partner I mentioned in the other thread (the one who hovered her hand over what she thought I should be playing from dummy) liked to open pretty much anything in the ~20 point range 2NT. She never could understand why she kept missing slams :/.

 

ahydra

If their methods can handle 2NT containing a 5card major then she shouldn't miss many slams that the rest of the room will be calling. I'd be more concerned about getting set in NT when her partner has a weak hand and they miss a safe partial in a suit.

[Cyberyeti]

If their methods can handle 2NT containing a 5card major then she shouldn't miss many slams that the rest of the room will be calling. I'd be more concerned about getting set in NT when her partner has a weak hand and they miss a safe partial in a suit.

 

Difficult to deal with somebody opening 2N and then cueing a singleton, really causes you to misevaluate KJxx and if they don't, you miss the suit slam opposite xxxx.

[pescetom]

Difficult to deal with somebody opening 2N and then cueing a singleton, really causes you to misevaluate KJxx and if they don't, you miss the suit slam opposite xxxx.

 

It's usually going to be the 2N hand that is making the decisive evaluation, however.

But I agree that overall it's a dubious way to bid, certainly not my choice (we open 2NT any 5332 most 5422 and some 6m322).

[RMB1]

We should not forget that 2NT is only an infraction if they have an agreement to open 2NT on this hand and that agreement is not permitted.

[pran]

We should not forget that 2NT is only an infraction if they have an agreement to open 2NT on this hand and that agreement is not permitted.

It is nevertheless an infraction if such agreement is not properly disclosed to opponents.

[barmar]

Even in Italy, which has a much less creative RA than ACBL, it seems to me that the 2NT opening in question would be an infraction if bid without alert.

How can they be expected to alert it if they have no agreement to bid like this?

[Vampyr]

How can they be expected to alert it if they have no agreement to bid like this?

 

If they have an agreement and know it is illegal, surely they will not alert.

 

I guess the main question is “IS the agreement illegal if properly disclosed?”

 

If this was answered in the thread, forgive me, it is very late and I cannot sleep in this heat.

[sanst]

There’s another question to be answered: “Are the opponents damaged?” N has nine clear tricks and I don’t see how NS can make another. So, if the 2NT was illegal, and that is a big if, the only thing the TD can do is give a PP.

[StevenG]

There’s another question to be answered: “Are the opponents damaged?” N has nine clear tricks and I don’t see how NS can make another. So, if the 2NT was illegal, and that is a big if, the only thing the TD can do is give a PP.

That analysis is incorrect. North only has eight tricks. (I'm not sure where you think the ninth is - the diamond is ruffed.) West thinks it's safe to cash out the Ace of clubs for the setting trick because North cannot, by regulation, have a singleton club. Had he exited with a heart, the contract should still be off. So there is damage.