Join Bridge Winners
Another bad club ruling?

West
83
J6
97642
AQ86
North
QJ
A8732
AKJ10
104
East
10965
KQ109
Q53
J2
South
AK742
54
8
K9753
W
N
E
S
 
P
P
P
1
P
1
P
2
P
3
X
3
P
4
P
P
P
D
4 South
NS: 0 EW: 0

3 was alerted.  I asked North for an explanation of the partnership agreements.  I was told "4th suit, forcing for one round, presumably asking for a club stopper".  Probably unwisely (!), I doubled.  North and South proceeded as shown.  South did not correct the explanation.

I led the A and 4 thus made.

After the hand, I asked South about the 3 call.  She said it is just forcing for one round.  North said that the meaning was undiscussed.

I called the director, reiterated what had transpired, and opined that I thought that the "presumably asking for a club stopper" seemed, in light of the post-play explanation of "undiscussed" to be Mis Information and that the MI had contributed to my leading the A, giving away the contract.

The ruling was that since 3 was forcing for one round, there was no adjustment.

Yeah, I know, this was just a club game, South is an average club level player and North is a slightly above average club level player.  But my question is ... was the ruling correct?

 

139 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top