[weejonnie]

---

At a certain bridge club 300 miles North of London, 4 players, none of which had animalar initials or Secretarial Bird pedantry 'played' the hand.

1NT was weak, 2♣ was alerted at PPAstro - Hearts & Clubs (actual agreement). 3♥ wasn't alerted (invitational in hearts), nor 4♣ (Unauthorised Panic in clubs)

So the poor director gets called. What should be the final ruling?

a) 3♥ doubled by East -4 (NS+1100) on the basis that West should pass 3♥ and North will double.
b) 3NT doubled by West -4 (NS+1100) on the basis that West will think that with a maximum and all suits stopped 3N has chances
c) 5♣ doubled by West -4 (NS+1100) on the basis that 3♥ should be a splinter agreeing clubs
d) 4♣ - 3 (Table result)
e) Some other result or reason.

[The_Badger]

hi weejonnie,

These things happen! Personally I'd be happy with +150 given that East/West have a cold 4♠ contract on. Bridge directors have better things to do than to be called to a table where the opponents have landed in a crap contract through forgetfulness

[Cyberyeti]

As far as W was concerned, he made a natural 2♣ bid, partner bid 3♥, whether this is fit or natural in analogous auctions in their system, I'd suggest W is going to bid again, and it's entirely possible the right bid is 3N, where N warned of the opposing 4-3 heart fit leads a pointy suit and lets it through, so I'd not be too fast to give an adjustment. (can the pp be 4♥ and 5♣ ?)

If 3♥ would be fit and not necessarily any great hand, it's possible 4♣ is the right bid.

I'm not sure 3♥ is alertable, so I'm not sure there is any MI, W has effectively psyched but there is UI.

[lamford]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-September-13, 18:37, said:

where N warned of the opposing 4-3 heart fit leads a pointy suit and lets it through, so I'd not be too fast to give an adjustment.

Interesting card-counting, or sarcasm which was lost on me. Given that there was no announcement that 1NT can contain a void, I think that North will realise that the opponents do not have seven hearts, and he will take out two red cards, one to collect his 1100 by doubling the obvious 3NT by West, and the other when he leads the king of hearts. West does have UI from the alert, and 3NT is more than a logical alternative, it is the normal bid. If West is experienced, one should consider giving him a PP for the 4C bid; if he is not, then a warning and the TD should explain why such calls get a loud DIRECTOOOOOOR call from SB at a club 300 miles South of Scotland.

[weejonnie]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-September-13, 18:37, said:

As far as W was concerned, he made a natural 2♣ bid, partner bid 3♥, whether this is fit or natural in analogous auctions in their system, I'd suggest W is going to bid again, and it's entirely possible the right bid is 3N, where N warned of the opposing 4-3 heart fit leads a pointy suit and lets it through, so I'd not be too fast to give an adjustment. (can the pp be 4♥ and 5♣ ?)

If 3♥ would be fit and not necessarily any great hand, it's possible 4♣ is the right bid.

I'm not sure 3♥ is alertable, so I'm not sure there is any MI, W has effectively psyched but there is UI.

I've had a further look at this - using the EBU white book.

1) If there is no LA to 4♣ (no heart tolerance) then it is allowed. If not then 3NT seems the only possible LA
2) Playing in 3NT (possibly doubled) there is a chance North (who does not know but who may suspect the misbid) will lead a pointy suit as he is entryless.
3) If so we need to factor in probabilities and see if NS are damaged when we go through the weighted options. If not then the score stands.
4) East may be able to legitimately field the 4♣ call if he can tell from his own hand (club void) and bidding (Partner pulls 3♥) that partner has misbid. - in which case there is no adjustment.
5) If it is decided that East cannot field the 4♣call then the contract will almost certainly be 4♥ doubled as West will give up.

Edit: From the EBU White book - which helpfully notes

"It is not possible to provide guidance as to the strength of evidence required before a player may legitimately act on the basis that partner has misbid. Individual cases are rare, and can be judged on their merits."

[mr1303]

What hand would bid 3H here? Assuming it's not a splinter (lack of heart bidding suggests not, then a hand like
KQJxxx of hearts and the A of clubs would fit the bill. With 3 cover cards and a good club suit, I think options are both 3NT and 4H, both of which get doubled. Are split scores allowed? Some percentage of 3NT X - lots and 4H X - lots.

[lamford]

weejonnie, on 2016-September-14, 03:43, said:

2) Playing in 3NT (possibly doubled) there is a chance North (who does not know but who may suspect the misbid) will lead a pointy suit as he is entryless.

4) East may be able to legitimately field the 4♣ call if he can tell from his own hand (club void) and bidding (Partner pulls 3♥) that partner has misbid. - in which case there is no adjustment.

We do not need to consider what happens after 4C by West, as that bid was struck out as using UI. I tend to agree that 3NT is the only LA, and North KNOWS that a wheel has come off. He has six hearts, his partner has 2+, West has shown 4+ and East has bid an invitational 3H, showing three or more. That is at least 15 hearts in the pack. So, North will double and lead a top heart. Every day of every week. He knows that you cannot pull because of the UI. And I would give 100% of -1100 as the rest of the defence is trivial. And I think 4Hx is also -1100 so we don't really need to consider the chance of that.

[Cyberyeti]

lamford, on 2016-September-14, 02:17, said:

Interesting card-counting, or sarcasm which was lost on me. Given that there was no announcement that 1NT can contain a void, I think that North will realise that the opponents do not have seven hearts, and he will take out two red cards, one to collect his 1100 by doubling the obvious 3NT by West, and the other when he leads the king of hearts. West does have UI from the alert, and 3NT is more than a logical alternative, it is the normal bid. If West is experienced, one should consider giving him a PP for the 4C bid; if he is not, then a warning and the TD should explain why such calls get a loud DIRECTOOOOOOR call from SB at a club 300 miles South of Scotland.

Good point, missed that, but 3N is not obvious (or even really an option) if 3♥ over a NATURAL 2♣ would be something like ♥KJ10xx, ♣Kxxx which is not inconceivable (it would for us if we played a natural 2♣). Yes if 3♥ is nat inv/F over a natural 2♣, 3N is beyond obvious.

[weejonnie]

mr1303, on 2016-September-14, 04:40, said:

What hand would bid 3H here? Assuming it's not a splinter (lack of heart bidding suggests not, then a hand like
KQJxxx of hearts and the A of clubs would fit the bill. With 3 cover cards and a good club suit, I think options are both 3NT and 4H, both of which get doubled. Are split scores allowed? Some percentage of 3NT X - lots and 4H X - lots.

I assume you mean "Sitting as West, what hand does my partner hold to bid 3 Hearts over my 2 Clubs" - To East it was an invitational raise in hearts. I suspect that there is no partnership agreement on this but it does sort of feel forcing. My first impression (at the table) was that I would be awarding 4H* - lots, however further research suggests that both the 4 Club bid and the subsequent pass MAY be allowed. (My gut feeling is that there are LAs to 4♣ (as you mention) in which case Law 75 and 16B force us to disallow it.) (Had West more values in Clubs and less outside then 4♣ might have been the only logical action.)

Weighted decisions are allowed - they may have to include some percentage of 3NT(*) making as that is a possibility. Although that of course is a much better score for EW than 4C-3 it can be allowed provided the OVERALL effect is worse for EW i.e. NS are damaged.

NB A Split decision is one where different scores are attributable to NS and EW - usually due to SeWOG actions. That doesn't really apply in this case. Yes South has AKJX of clubs and A hearts BUT partner could have absolutely nothing on the bidding (and, to South, EW might 'escape' to a cold 4♥ contract).

[lamford]

weejonnie, on 2016-September-14, 06:24, said:

<snip>further research suggests that both the 4 Club bid and the subsequent pass MAY be allowed.<snip>

Where did you do that research? Nothing in the Laws or White Book suggests that West can (legally) recover from this.

[lamford]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-September-14, 06:21, said:

Good point, missed that, but 3N is not obvious (or even really an option) if 3♥ over a NATURAL 2♣ would be something like ♥KJ10xx, ♣Kxxx which is not inconceivable (it would for us if we played a natural 2♣). Yes if 3♥ is nat inv/F over a natural 2♣, 3N is beyond obvious.

Would not 2H be that, a sort of FNJ bid showing five hearts and 4 clubs by a passed hand, or maybe 5 good hearts and only three clubs? I would expect 3H to be a better hand than you give, and it is obviously undiscussed as they were playing PP Astro. As SB would say, you pinpointed the weakness in your system ...

[Cyberyeti]

lamford, on 2016-September-14, 06:32, said:

Would not 2H be that, a sort of FNJ bid showing five hearts and 4 clubs by a passed hand, or maybe 5 good hearts and only three clubs? I would expect 3H to be a better hand than you give, and it is obviously undiscussed as they were playing PP Astro. As SB would say, you pinpointed the weakness in your system ...

You have no idea what my system is, and it can't be much better than that and not be opened (a 54 10 count we would open 1 unless there was a good reason not to).

2♥ would almost certainly be 5-3 or a weaker 5-4, probably with indifferent hearts.

3♥ given what we open weak 2s on would actually be almost certain to be Axxxx(x)/Axxx but that's by the by, most people don't play our weak 2s.

If you play fit jumps in response to other simple 2♣ overcalls, I think it's reasonable to assume you do here in working out what you do next ie if (1♦/♠)-2♣-(P)-3♥ was fit, it's reasonable to assume this is.

[StevenG]

Shouldn't you poll peers to work out what are the logical alternatives? You need players who 1) choose to play pinpoint Astro, and 2) are prone to forgetting that they actually have a defence to 1NT.

Having found those players, I would be very surprised if they did not all say that 3♥ is a completely impossible bit that can only show that the wheels have come off.

[weejonnie]

lamford, on 2016-September-14, 06:28, said:

Where did you do that research? Nothing in the Laws or White Book suggests that West can (legally) recover from this.

1.4.5.4 (North bids 3♣ intended as natural)

South alerts and explains 3clubs as spades and diamonds; North (who has clubs) bids a firm 4 Clubs and South (who ought to treat this as a slam try, or perhaps 5=0=5=3 and a good hand) passes for the remainder of the auction. If North proves to have spade support or even tolerance, the director will usually adjust to some number of spades by North-South, probably doubled.

But if North doesn’t have spade support, and there is no logical alternative to 4C, the 4C bid is not an infraction. Nevertheless, the subsequent Pass by South has fielded the original 3 Club misbid. The TD rules that South is in breach of Law 16 and adjusts to whatever he considers North-South would reach if South kept bidding (again, the ruling will probably be some contract doubled)

Now look at the part about mis-bidding

1.4.5.5

If a player describes his partner’s bid as showing a particular hand type, and then acts as if his partner had a different hand type, that player is usually attempting to field a misbid (or a psyche). Of course, it is possible that a player knows from the legal auction and from his own hand that his partner has misbid – for example, partner shows three aces in response to Gerber but the player has three aces. It is also possible that a player has a hand that makes it very likely but not certain that partner has misbid – for example, partner opens a Texas 4C (showing a good pre-empt in hearts) and the player holds K10xxxx and no clubs. It is not possible to provide guidance as to the strength of evidence required before a player may legitimately act on the basis that partner has misbid. Individual cases are rare, and can be judged on their merits.

I would agree that the White book as shown is not consistent - the rules about mis-bidding and fielding have changed but the consequences do not seem to have been reviewed.

[lamford]

StevenG, on 2016-September-14, 07:09, said:

Shouldn't you poll peers to work out what are the logical alternatives? You need players who 1) choose to play pinpoint Astro, and 2) are prone to forgetting that they actually have a defence to 1NT.

Having found those players, I would be very surprised if they did not all say that 3♥ is a completely impossible bit that can only show that the wheels have come off.

You do need to find people who play or know how to play pinpoint Astro, but you do not need or want people prone to forgetting and considering that aspect. Those people are subsconsiously using the UI. You should proceed as follows:

a) You have (for the purpose of polling) agreed to play natural over 1NT. You overcall 2C and your partner, who has passed, bids 3H. You are playing weak twos which are (xxxxxxxx and can/cannot be a five-card suits).

b) What bids do you seriously consider, and what call do you make?

I would be surprised if everyone at this level did not shrug and bid 3NT. One thing that is certain is that 3H shows hearts and a club fit. The strength may depend on aspects of the system (which we find out and tell the pollees). Given that xx Axxxx xx Kxxx makes 3NT is excellent (it is unlikely either opponent has five spades), I would expect thinking people to bid it.

[Cyberyeti]

lamford, on 2016-September-14, 08:13, said:

I would be surprised if everyone at this level did not shrug and bid 3NT. One thing that is certain is that 3H shows hearts and a club fit. The strength may depend on aspects of the system (which we find out and tell the pollees). Given that xx Axxxx xx Kxxx makes 3NT is excellent (it is unlikely either opponent has five spades), I would expect thinking people to bid it.

Excellent is overstated, how do you fancy it on a heart lead ? You have to win or they switch to spades, now ♣AJx which has to be possible is very problematic (as is a lead from 5 hearts if your intermediates are poor).

Also substitute ♥KQJ for the A, and it's close to ZP on a spade lead, you're shooting for something very specific.

Quote

What hand would bid 3H here? Assuming it's not a splinter (lack of heart bidding suggests not, then a hand like
KQJxxx of hearts and the A of clubs would fit the bill. With 3 cover cards and a good club suit, I think options are both 3NT and 4H, both of which get doubled. Are split scores allowed? Some percentage of 3NT X - lots and 4H X - lots.

To Mr1303 - What ? a hand that didn't pass in 1st seat you mean

[lamford]

weejonnie, on 2016-September-14, 08:03, said:

If a player describes his partner’s bid as showing a particular hand type, and then acts as if his partner had a different hand type, that player is usually attempting to field a misbid (or a psyche). Of course, it is possible that a player knows from the legal auction and from his own hand that his partner has misbid – for example, partner shows three aces in response to Gerber but the player has three aces. It is also possible that a player has a hand that makes it very likely but not certain that partner has misbid – for example, partner opens a Texas 4C (showing a good pre-empt in hearts) and the player holds K10xxxx and no clubs. It is not possible to provide guidance as to the strength of evidence required before a player may legitimately act on the basis that partner has misbid. Individual cases are rare, and can be judged on their merits.

There is no problem with the 3H bid. That player does not have any UI in any case. When his partner bids 4C that sounds like a slam try, and East should sign off in 4H, but he does not have any UI so can bid as he chooses. However, the 4C bid is illegal, in that it uses UI. There is no evidence from the 3H bid that the player has misbid. The evidence is all from the alert and explanation. Whatever 3H means in response to a natural 2C overcall (we could find out for example what Pass-(1D Precision)-2C(Natural)-Pass-3H means to this pair. We can also ask them if they play fit jumps by a passed hand, and if they play fit jumps in competiion. Many low-level players would have no idea what you are talking about, of course. But I don't see any inconsistency in the White Book, which would class the 4C bid here as a breach of both 16B and 73C.

[lamford]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-September-14, 08:25, said:

Excellent is overstated, how do you fancy it on a heart lead ? You have to win or they switch to spades, now ♣AJx which has to be possible is very problematic

Indeed, and I would finesse the club on the first round, only losing to stiff jack in North, which must be well below 30%. But KQxxx hearts and K(J)xx of clubs is a real danger, although I would only bid 2H on that, as the purpose of 3H must surely be to shoot for 3NT. The other question is what 2NT followed by 3H should mean - although I think this pair will not have discussed any of this stuff. Which is why we need to find out what the methods actually are - theirs not yours or mine - and poll accordingly. And I will take my chance that oppo cannot cash four heart tricks in a suit in which my partner made a fit jump!

[barmar]

lamford, on 2016-September-14, 08:26, said:

There is no evidence from the 3H bid that the player has misbid. The evidence is all from the alert and explanation.

If it would mean a long heart suit, isn't there evidence from the fact that partner didn't open 1♥ or 2♥?

[lamford]

barmar, on 2016-September-14, 09:33, said:

If it would mean a long heart suit, isn't there evidence from the fact that partner didn't open 1♥ or 2♥?

All that evidence indicates is that it is not pre-emptive (or he would have pre-empted) and not a weak two (or he would have opened a weak two) and not an opening bid (or he would have opened the bidding). It must therefore be FIT.

"when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Holmes