Join Bridge Winners
What's your ruling ?

Swiss Teams game with screens, six matches, 16 boards per match with a break, second half of the penultimate round, board # 6, EW/E, closed room, layout of low cards as remembered by the players, sorry about that, TD failed to note these.

West
QJ8xxx
K9x
Ax
10x
North
97xx
xx
xx
KQJxx
East
QJxx
Kxxxx
Axxx
South
AK10
A10xx
QJxx
xx
W
N
E
S
P
1NT
2
2NT
4
X
4
X
P
P
P
D
4X West
NS: 0 EW: 0

Further to the double from N, E calls the TD. It appears that NS play the weak NT (11-14, balanced hand without 5 card major) while non vulnerable and EW use the 2♥overcall as showing a six card ♠suit over a weak 1NT opening and a ♥and a minor two-suiter over a 15-17 1NT opening.E says that the only reason for his 4♥call was the fact he was not aware the opponents played the weak NT and N disagrees and states that he clearly explained the partner’s opening to E when he requested him to explain W’s 2♥overcall. N was told that the 2♥overcall showed a ♥and a minor two-suiter and informed E his 2NT bid was a transfer to 3♣.The TD’s ruling: ‘’ There is no exchange of information in writing, I’m not able to find out what really happened, you knew how to do the bidding without me then you should know now how to deal with the play” Then he left, NS scored 800, in the open room NS scored 90.At the end of the penultimate round the TD posted the results, ranking and the final round matches (Swiss Teams Game)At that moment, one of the players from the open room called the TD again with regards to this board, challenging the score (12 IMPs to the opponents) After a quarter of an hour, the TD changed his initial ruling although no new element was brought to his knowledge. The board was cancelled, 3 IMPs were given to EW and NS were found guilty of misleading EW. The TD also denied the right of appeal against his second ruling to the Board of Game Directors before the final round was played, without explaining on what grounds he decided to do so.As a consequence, the results, ranking and final round matches were changed.

Please, if you were to rule, as an appeals committee’s member, on the TD’s ruling, and parties involved presented the following argument:

EW team in the closed room says that if N explained the meaning of his partner’s 1NT opening bid , E would not have bid 4♥.

The other team says that not only the 1NT opening bid has been properly explained, but also E’s 4♥call with a ♠void shows that E clearly has lost his way in the auction of that hand and the fact he has called the TD under these circumstances, could be in breach of the International Code Laws of Duplicate Bridge, art. 21 A.

What would be your ruling ?

 

82 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top