Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Portwood
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Iff the MI and the adjusted scores were agreed.

You say you won 5 imps ( 170 - 210) - since you obtained +110 I am guessing that your team mates scored +100. If the MI is found then you lose 1 imp (+100 - 140) and gain 4 imps (+100 + 50) - which averages out at +1.5 imps.

So you lose 3.5 imps and the match by 0.5 imps. I hope that this wouldn't have affected your qualifying.
June 6, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no penalty if a person makes a second revoke in the same suit (64B). However the Director may restore equity (64C).

Law 81C

C. Director’s Duties and Powers

The Director (not the players) has the responsibility for rectifying irregularities and redressing damage. The Director’s duties and powers normally include also the following:


1) to maintain discipline and to ensure the orderly progress of the game.

2) to administer and interpret these Laws and to advise the players of their rights and responsibilities thereunder.

3) to rectify an error or irregularity of which he becomes aware in any manner, within the correction period established in accordance with Law 79C.

4) to assess rectification when applicable and to exercise the powers given him in Laws 90 and 91.

5) to waive rectification for cause, in his discretion, upon the request of the non-offending side.

6)to adjust disputes.

7)to refer any matter to an appropriate committee.

8)to report results for the official record if the Tournament Organizer requires it and to deal with any other matters delegated to him by the Tournament Organizer.

So under this law he should rectify an irregularity (3) as he is aware that a person has failed to follow suit.
June 6, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
KQJ XX XXXX XXXX?
June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East is claiming damage based on 2NT should have been alerted for the minors, not showing values and saying that they would have bid if it had been known that 2N was for the minors.

So the question is: should the bid have been alerted and, if so, was EW damaged by the failure to alert?

Since discussion by OP and commentators suggest that the bid should have been alerted, it is then a question of whether EW have been damaged by the MI. (By being put off bidding 3S).

Normally a poll would be done to see how many Easts would have bid on the correct auction (as I understand it) and if the bid is reasonable then an award has to be made. In the EBU this would be a combination of 3S making (+140) and 3S going one off (-50) with a suitable percentage depending on how likely the heart ruff would be found (pretty likely). If not then then someone would have to decide whether +140 or -50 was the correct award for EW (NS getting -140).

The TD (or AC) would have to decide whether EW were damaged and, if so, could have protected themselves better or if their subsequent actions were IWoG. We do not know - other than the fact that the TD decided to let the score stand.

I do not know of any place in the Laws of Bridge that allows a defence that it is ‘just bridge’.
June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since 2NT is not a jump by a passed hand nor a high level NT bid then if it is conventional i.e. partnership agreement and not natural then it should have been alerted - the lack of the alert being UI and the TD should have offered West their bid back (21B) when called to the table and interview EW (as he did) away from the table to find out what, if any bids, they would have made.

If there is no partnership agreement then there is no need to alert. However laws are that an error is misexplanation rather than misbid.

However EW do have an obligation to ascertain if the bid is or isn't natural in order to protect themselves. failure to do so may prejudice their position. It is extremely rare for 2NT to be used naturally in a competitive auction so any experienced pair should (IMHO) ask (although by asking it could convey UI to their partner).

If there was was a misexplanation (failure to alert) and since East cannot have her bid back (21B), the TD (if he feels EW have been damaged) should award award adjusted scores (40C). (Which would presumably be NS -140 for NS and could be either +140 or -50 for EW - depending on whether the heart ruff is obvious (12C1e). The imp swing would be based on the average of the two swings.

Was there any facility for making an appeal by EW?
June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner's hand : AT9 KQ KQ932 A83.

It seems that there is no LA for 3 from the polling. Thanks to all who voted.
June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since I never like underleading Kings and trumps is an obvious no-no I am left with a spade.
June 4, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why hasn't North made a move over the 4 bid by South? 4 Hearts to the A 10, 3 first round controls (and a second round control), partner bids a new suit at the 4 level! Was there a BIT? If there was then I would agree EW were fixed if a TD so ruled. If not then obviously there wasn't.

EW should of course refrain from, in effect, accusing NS of cheating and if they had concerns should call the TD. ‘Slagging off’ the other pair is contrary to every bridge law and ethic I have seen.
June 4, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It looks as if East has suit preferenced for Hearts and West for Clubs. If East has the A, K and a club honour (or West might have led from KQJXX) then there isn't really room for an additional 2 points (Q).

Of course it helps to know the standard and consistency of EW.

Looking at Vacant Spaces :
East has shown 6S and 1D
West has shown 2S, 1H and 2D making it 6:8, not 6:9

(I suppose in theory South can cash A and get it down to 5:7 which are better odds)

With regards to the Spade lead - do EW play Roman? if they do then East could have feared KQ doubleton (notwithstanding that South has bid NT
June 3, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That I won't argue (not that it would have affected our position) However when you get down to it - the 1NT bid in this position is EXACTLY equivalent to an unusual 2NT bid, albeit at one level lower.

(In the UK the vast majority of players play the opening 1 as natural, rather than a prepared bid preparatory to rebidding 1NT to show a weak hand, no 5 card major. This means that partner doesn't have the same problems in bidding in a competitive auction that seem to be endemic in ACBL land)

As for the misexplanation - this was the first time we tried our amended defensive bidding system. As mentioned above, I do not excuse us from the error because of this fact.
May 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely the same logic applies to the opponents? Total trick is correct if they have a singleton somewhere but deduct 1 if they don't have a singelton somewhere.

However the probability that they have a singleton is independent of the probability that we have a singelton (Despite what Culbertson said)

(I already have considered the cases assuming that when one side has 9 trumps the other side has 1 loser (2 if they don't have a singleton) and when one side has 8 trumps the other side has 2 losers.) Note that 9+1 = 8+2 = 10.

TNT = 26 - losers in both hands
TNT = 10 + 10 + 6 - losers in neutral suits - losers in trump suits
TNT = Trump fit + opponent loser + trump fit + opponent losers + 6 - losers in neutral suits - losers in trump -loser in trump
Therefore IFF there are 6 losers in the neutral suits
TNT = Trump fit

Thus if the opponents have a 9 card fit and your holdings are 2=2 then there is an extra loser - and you hold it. Similarly if you hold a 9 card fit and the opponents dont have a singleton then there is an extra loser - and they hold it.

This seems well bourne out by Steve's analysis.

However the following should also apply. If the opponents have an 8-card fit and you have a singleton then there is one less loser - and you have lost it.

Of greater importance is the supposition that there are 6 losers in the other two suits. If you hold only two cards in one of the other two suits then you have lost a loser. If you hold a singleton in one of the other two suits you have lost two losers and if you hold a void then you have lost 3 losers.

This assumes that you can ruff or set up the cards in the suit opposite - holding 8 (or maybe 9) trumps this may be impossible. Holding a shortage in a neutral suit increases the chance of a double fit (lots more tricks for both sides) as the total losers in the neutral suits plummets.
May 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Board No 19 E/W Vul Dealer South
Pairs Contract Scores Points
N/S E/W Bid By Tks N/S E/W N/S E/W
2 9 3 E = 140 7 11
10 11 3 S -1 50 12 6
13 5 3 E +1 170 3 15
14 1 2 E +2 170 3 15
15 3 3 W -1 100 16 2
16 4 3 S = 110 18 0
17 8 2 E +1 140 7 11
18 6 2 S = 90 14 4
19 12 3? S -2 100 10 8
20 7 2NT* S -3 500 0 18

(Ours is the top one. Note that in the UK we award 2 points for each win and 1 for a tie - in the US I believe it is 1 for a win and 1/2 for a tie.)
May 30, 2013
John Portwood edited this comment May 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In principle a sound suggestion. In practice there are a lot of ‘blanket’ conventions permitted by the EBU (even at level 3) where different defences might have to be worked out (and all for two or three hands) which could delay the movement substantially.

FWIW here is the EBU definition of permitted level 3.(which is actually a lower level than most EBU events)

12 N 6 Two-suiter overcalls
Jump overcalls, simple or jump cue bids of an opponent’s suit or bids of no trumps may be played to show a two-suiter of any agreed strength as long as one of the suits is specified.

After that any action by either side is permitted.
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tricky - as the incident occurred in England. (The EBU do give powers to TDs in EBU licenced events to force pairs who do not have properly completed convention cards, to play a simple system (WNT, Stayman and Blackwood)). I agree that in such an event a PP might well be warranted. At the club in question CCs are very rarely in evidence which you would argue (and I would agree) is against rules.
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No - I open 4 Namyats. However the situation is not the same in that there are several cards that will engender the 10th trick and so partner is very likely to have one of them. When you bid to the 6 level missing two aces then there are only two cards that can help

(last Night I opened 4 on AKQT753 K74 54 3 - and only went 3 off.)
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He still has two losers.
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe I misexplained - we like to get into the auction so the 1NT bid shows roughly what this hand has - its pressure is just that it pre-empts the 1S response. Partner ‘knew’ that I held roughly what I did. (5-4 or 5-5 in the red suits with a weak to intermediate hand values). In terms of such a 2-suited hand, the hand shown is pretty ‘pure’ with all values in the two suits ‘shown’.
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If North takes back the pass and now bids 4, I assume that East would have to bid 4 since it is now ‘certain’ that West has Spades and Diamonds. (Or can he assume that East has hearts since he didn't raise 3 to 4?)

The only winning solution is to make sure that this doesn't come up again!
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Give East 10 and the contract can make on a non-club lead. (A, ruff, Club to 10, heart ruff, club to Ace, heart ruff, draw trumps (if necessary), diamond to Ace, cash fifth heart discarding losing spade). Still below the theoretical odds but not by much. Give East 4 Diamonds and the contract also walks home - however bidding a grand looking for a special distribution in partner's hand is losing play.
May 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play in England and under EBU rules 1NT has to be alerted when made. I am not sure what ‘pre-alert’ means. Is it different from the usual ‘alert’? Or does it mean ‘watch out! We play an unusual system’?

FWIW, this was the first time our partnership was trying a new sequence of defensive overcalls (designed to stop in 2M if that is sensible). This is an explanation, but not an excuse for the MI.
May 29, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top