Join Bridge Winners
TD decision: I'm still scratching my head

West
K8765
7
Q
KJ10987
North
AQ10
KQJ32
65
A32
East
J9
965
KJ87
Q654
South
432
A1084
A109432
W
N
E
S
1
P
2
2NT
P
3
X
P
P
P
D
3X East
NS: 0 EW: 0

 

This hand had left me dismayed by the direction modern day directing is going.

 

Some explanation of the bidding - 1 was strong, 2 natural positive, 2N was explained by E to N as hearts and clubs and by W to S as clubs and a major. Double was take out. Screens in use.

 

Director was summoned at the end of the hand. There was nothing written to substantiate any of the explanations.

There was no argument whether we were harmed, the +200 registered couldn't compensate the easy vulnerable game. But the case was "quite complicated" as the director said, leaving us quite perplexed, as it looked as a routine change of score to +650.

 

After much consultation between the directorial staff, they came up with this gem: 50% of the time the contract is 6 made 20% of the cases. 50% of the time contract is 4 making 11 tricks. Net result -5 imps against the heart game at the other table. We were assured that this is along the latest practices and the percentages were taken from the scoresheets of the other matches. Actually the slam is an easy make if you know of the 2 suiter.

BTW it was an European tournament under WBF rules and the directorial staff was quite qualified.

 

What happened with compensating the non offending side? Any thoughts on the case?

77 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top