[rigour6]

Here's the auction:

1C - pass- 1S- 2D

The 1C opener now asks 2D overcaller for a description of his bid.
He answers "natural".

She then asks, what's your point range?
His answer, "We have no agreement."

And our hapless TD is called to the table.

Overcaller has 10 HCPs. He says he has no agreement with his partner (probably the first game he ever played with him). I say, good enough for me.

Opener: "How can I know what to bid when I don't know his point range?"
Me: "what can I tell you, mark him for an overcall hand and do your best. (not sure I should say this much but it's a friendly game)"
Opener: "what's his range?"
Me: "I'd mark him 8 to 16 and make your judgment based on that."


And much protestations follows.

Auction continues:

2S - 3D - 3S - 4D

And now opener bids with a comment

4S

"They're not allowed to double."

Me (privately to her): I certainly would have allowed a double there had they made one.


What I think I did wrong:

I should have just said, "They have no agreement. Play on, please." and not even got into discussion past that. But as I say It's a friendly game and I like to placate. It's a weakness. There are so few times when I could have been a jerk and didn't, rather than the reverse, I allow myself those small moments.



What the opener thinks I did wrong:

I should have insisted the 2D overcaller indicate a range of HCPs for his overcall, even though there is no agreement.
I should have taken out a penalty double had they made one (irrelevant in this actual case).


And I now await the wisdom of the sages.

[jtfanclub]

rigour6, on Oct 23 2007, 11:38 AM, said:

I should have insisted the 2D overcaller indicate a range of HCPs for his overcall, even though there is no agreement.
I should have taken out a penalty double had they made one (irrelevant in this actual case).

If they don't have an agreement, they don't have an agreement.

If they're a regular partnership, they likely know tendencies ("Partner like to double with a 16 count and a suit", or "Partner usually has 10+, though we don't have an agreement on that") and they should disclose them. If they aren't a regular partnership, then 'no agreement' is sufficient.

The idea that they can't X regardless of what was said, Unauthorized Information, exposed cards, or whatever is nonsense. There is no such rule.

[cherdano]

If I were TD, I would just mark opener as enemy, since I just wouldn't want to deal with him in one of my tourneys ever again. Those who are 100% convinced they know the rules but in fact have no clue are the biggest troublemakers.

[matmat]

i would solemnly inquire about the point ranges of the opener and responder first.

gack... why is point count such a big deal to people...

[hrothgar]

Step 1: Explain to Opener that the opponents have an obligation to explain their agreements. If they don't have an agreement about the strength required for an overcall, so be it.

Step 2: Pray that opener is willing to let matters rest.

Step 3: When Opener claims that she needs to know precisely how many High Card Points overcaller holds announce that this is UI to his / her partner.

Step 4: If Opener continues to insist that he/she needs to know precisely how many points in held tell them that if they need to ask, then they're probably too clueless to make use of the information.

Step 5: When Opener states "They aren't allowed to double" during a live auction hit him/her with a proceedural penalty.

[jdonn]

hrothgar, on Oct 23 2007, 12:33 PM, said:

Step 4: If Opener continues to insist that he/she needs to know precisely how many points in held tell them that if they need to ask, then they're probably too clueless to make use of the information.

Precisely. Against the fish who insist on knowing, I just give them an extremely wide range I will always be inside of, so there I would say something like 6-20. That way I will never be misexplaining with regard to what I actually hold, and it makes the clueless people happy since you gave them the information they crave. Of course no director or rulebook would recommend such a thing, but it makes life a lot easier and I certainly don't feel I am damaging them at all (although legally that might technically be wrong.)

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Oct 23 2007, 01:52 PM, said:

Precisely. Against the fish who insist on knowing, I just give them an extremely wide range I will always be inside of, so there I would say something like 6-20. That way I will never be misexplaining with regard to what I actually hold, and it makes the clueless people happy since you gave them the information they crave. Of course no director or rulebook would recommend such a thing, but it makes life a lot easier and I certainly don't feel I am damaging them at all (although legally that might technically be wrong.)

I can't see why this would be technically wrong, if this is the range of hands with which you might overcall. Opponents might only be interested in the minimum or maximum value you can have for your overcall. Tough to know what they are thinking or worried about, so you just answer their questions truthfully.

[Gerben42]

Urgs... I don't even know what point range I have for this auction. Probably somewhere in the 6 - 20 range, no doubt. I base overcalls on "I recognize one when I see one"...

[helene_t]

Richard is correct of course, but I don't think I would (nor should) show such a degree a of patience as a TD.

1) Explain opener that he can chose to believe the explanation or not, and he can complain after the deal if he thinks the explanation was wrong and he was damaged.

2) If opener persists, have him replaced by a sub, or cancel the rest of his boards (whichever is correct and convenient).