[mikeh]

The software prevents me from giving the at the table auction. North actually bid 5S in response to the king ask 5N.

---

The TD correctly ruled that north could correct his 5S bid but that south was barred. I think we’d mostly agree that logically he should bid 6S but then we wouldn’t have a story. Btw, south later claimed she had 24 hcp. As it is, 6S can’t make. So north almost hit a home run when he bid 5N, which had to be the final contract, south being barred


As west, I was happy leading a heart…whatever south was doing, hearts didn’t rate to be a source of tricks for her and every lead other than a spade was very dangerous.

Ok…so much for the comedy of the bidding. The play’s the thing

East rose with the heart king, south ducked and won the continuation. Look carefully….and tell me whether you’d rather declare or play 5N, after trick 2.


The comedy continued in a later round

---

Another auction that wouldn’t happen on BBO.

2C could have been 3=4=4=2, hence my rebid of 2N, influenced by the mp scoring in a weak field. 3S showed more than would 4S.

South intended to pass 3S but mistakenly pulled out the red card.I was surprised…in fact I’m pretty sure I paused in disbelief….but then passed. North passed smoothly and partner, looking distinctly puzzled, did the same. North, operating the bridgemate device entered the contract, asking ‘so it’s 3S…by west?’

I pointed out that it was doubled…the red card was still staring at us. South slapped her forehead…a gesture I’ve read about in countless (old) books…’who doubled?’ ‘You did’. ‘Omg, I didn’t mean to’

The TD was summoned. I explained that it was obvious to all that she’d pulled the wrong card. Meanwhile North volunteered that he hadn’t seen the double…and south had, while the TD was en route, put it back in her bidding box, leaving her previous pass card on the table. Fortunately she readily admitted that she’d pulled the wrong card, and North was in no way trying to wiggle out of it…he simply hadn’t been paying attention. He commented that he’d been surprised we’d stopped in 3S after I’d alerted 2C as gf, 2+clubs.

Ok, the lead was a heart.

The TD correctly ruled that North’s pass barred south from changing her call.

Great…we’re looking at a likely top….

I won the heart in hand and played a spade to the ace…south showed out!

Now I’m going down unless I can hold my club losers to 1.

Imagine, 4S goes down 2 undoubled and 3S down 1 doubled…average. Probably the equitable result…and maybe the funniest average board I’ve ever had

Fortunately for us, north held the stiff club Jack so there was no way to fail (although we had dinner with someone who beat 4S 3 tricks!)

I wonder how much BBO has contributed to these sorts of auctions. The 5S response to 5N is impossible on BBO and it’s very difficult to double when you meant to pass…in real life, she’d fouled up her bidding box. Had a x card in between pass cards.

I’ve also felt that there are more revokes these days…though none today.

[jillybean]

Funny.
Did North bid 6nt? I’ll play 5nt, not 6

[Cyberyeti]

5N can be made

Spoiler

play off ♦A and 6 rounds of spades. On the 5th and 6th spades E with ♥8 ♦KQ ♣Q10x has to part with ♥8 and ♦Q, then you throw him in with a diamond to give you 3 clubs (or 2 clubs and the ♦J if they lead the Q), neat strip squeeze

[mycroft]

I'd like to know why the ruling was what it was. I absolutely believe the TD did correctly rule, but I can see at least two cases where that would not be the case:

• North thought he was bidding spades for some reason. Then, 6♠ "specifies the same denomination[] as the insufficient bid" and is allowed by 27B1a with no restrictions on South.
  
• North was showing "no kings" to the specific King ask, but thought 5 was sufficient. Now 6♠ is a comparable call via 23A1 ("same meaning") and South again has no restrictions.

Other reasons for North bidding 5♠ ("I thought partner bid 5♦ queen ask") might have no legal "without restriction" options, and as I said, I'm not doubting the TD at the table.

(And I know, it's not relevant to a good play-of-the-hand story).

As to the "too much online" opinion, I don't "feel" like there have been more oopsies than before, even though there definitely is more recognition of them from people who do play online and are grateful for the opportunity to avoid these sections of the FLB. I also note that since screen regulations "effectively"(*) also remove those sections of the book too, we should encourage more use of screens in the ACBL, right?

What I do see and uptick of since 2020, and some people have admitted it's "too much online" (some just don't know), is self-alerting, or explaining rather than alerting. Which for some reason the opponents tend to be righteously aggrieved at, because *of course* it's so he can tell his partner what his bid meant...

(*) Screen regulations basically say "make a bidding infraction, call the TD and get it corrected without penalty. Send a bidding infraction through the screen, you've accepted it, keep playing" if proper procedures are followed (i.e. East doesn't bid *and* push the tray through). So, effectively, no possibility of insufficient bids, doubling partner, bids out of turn, etc.