[Apollo81]

Obviously there is no agreement, East is just inexperienced. Since everyone was fooled there is no adjustment.

[mikestar]

hrothgar, on Jun 6 2008, 12:51 PM, said:

1. I think its reasonable to explain toEast - West that they have a responsibility to know their system, especially when pretty basic sequences are involved

2. I think that North - South deserve an adjustment, though not the one that they are hoping to get

Leave the East - West score remain unchanged
Adjust the North South score to 4DX =

If I am feeling charitable, I might consider assigning a 25% probability that EW would go down in 4DX (It will still score a hell of a lot better than 4HX -2)

This is correct in spirit given that we have determined that two experienced players are trying to lawyer an undeserved good result against two beginners.

However, an adjustment to teach a lesson is not the correct answer, and neither is a procedural penalty. What I have imposed in cases of this nature is a law 91A disciplinary penalty. This carries a stronger implication of wrongful conduct than a PP and cannot be reversed on appeal.

[awm]

There are a few points that haven't been mentioned, which may stand out in N/S favor:

(1) South's "atrocious" double actually looks a lot better if east has clubs. Now south could easily have three clubs and a heart on defense, even giving north nothing for the free bid. The form of scoring also doesn't seem to have been specified -- doubling here at MP scoring is much more appealing than at IMPs. North's pull of the double on the basis that clubs will be ruffed in the short hand given his own (and partner, and supposedly east's) club length is also not unreasonable.

(2) I don't really see how to make 4♦ on best defense. Say a trump is lead. East seemingly has seven diamonds and two spades. There are not enough entries to ruff clubs three times and score the fifth.

On the other hand, it does seem as if N/S were correctly informed as to the E/W agreements such as they are; east just made a dumb bid. So I can't really see adjusting the result.

[jtfanclub]

awm, on Jun 6 2008, 03:08 PM, said:

There are a few points that haven't been mentioned, which may stand out in N/S favor:

(1) South's "atrocious" double actually looks a lot better if east has clubs. Now south could easily have three clubs and a heart on defense, even giving north nothing for the free bid. The form of scoring also doesn't seem to have been specified -- doubling here at MP scoring is much more appealing than at IMPs. North's pull of the double on the basis that clubs will be ruffed in the short hand given his own (and partner, and supposedly east's) club length is also not unreasonable.



On the other hand, it does seem as if N/S were correctly informed as to the E/W agreements such as they are; east just made a dumb bid. So I can't really see adjusting the result.

Or could easily have one trick. West hasn't shown clubs.

Form of scoring and vulnerability are listed. NV as they were, even in MPs an X would be horrible, and it was IMPs.

Quote

(2) I don't really see how to make 4♦ on best defense. Say a trump is lead. East seemingly has seven diamonds and two spades. There are not enough entries to ruff clubs three times and score the fifth.

So you lead a trump. They take it, lead a club. You take it, lead another trump. They take two spades, ending in dummy, and ruff one club. They then lead a third spade.

Scoring: IMP

---

Now what? Lead a spade, they sluff a heart. Lead a heart, you set up the king. Lead a club, and they can develop the 5th club.

[TimG]

awm, on Jun 6 2008, 03:08 PM, said:

(2) I don't really see how to make 4♦ on best defense. Say a trump is lead. East seemingly has seven diamonds and two spades. There are not enough entries to ruff clubs three times and score the fifth.

It almost plays itself. On a trump lead, suppose declarer wins and draws a second round of trumps then plays a club to south. South gets out with a spade (playing a heart or a club is no good). Declarer wins a spade in dummy, ruffs a club, cashes the other spade and exits a spade. South is on lead in this position:

---

The trick is to now discard a heart from dummy if south plays the Jack of Spades. Maybe not a play this beginner would find.

[Trinidad]

Am I the only one wondering what beginning players (less than 1 year of bridge, 3♣ as a cuebid) are doing in an event where screens are used? These people already have trouble holding thirteen cards in their hands. Counting to thirteen is nearly impossible and then you want them to understand the intricacies involved in playing with screens?!?

Rik

[blackshoe]

There's only like a dozen bridge players in the entire country (Venezuela), so if the beginners didn't play in the high level tournaments, they wouldn't have any!

Okay, I'm exaggerating. A little.

[Hanoi5]

Now it's a new problem. North/South claim West shouldn't have given East a club ruff. They say he had UI from North calling the director when East said 3♣ was natural (after being asked by North wothout dropping the curtain). What now?

[jtfanclub]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2008, 08:47 AM, said:

Now it's a new problem. North/South claim West shouldn't have given East a club ruff. They say he had UI from North calling the director when East said 3♣ was natural (after being asked by North wothout dropping the curtain). What now?

Hmmm...gonna depend on the play.

Club won in dummy. Let's say spade back, duck to the King. AK of diamonds, now a spade back to the ace.

Does West now have enough information to lead a club back?

Dummy lead a spade to an empty suit. QJ remaining in dummy is a terrible thing to lead to. Leading a red suit is obviously out. Leading a club shouldn't do any harm...there's nothing left for North to discard (any spades are winners, any diamonds get ruffed).

So on that sequence, I might allow a club.

[FrancesHinden]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2008, 02:47 PM, said:

Now it's a new problem. North/South claim West shouldn't have given East a club ruff. They say he had UI from North calling the director when East said 3♣ was natural (after being asked by North wothout dropping the curtain). What now?

I think you mean East said 3♣ is a cue bid.

They might possibly sort of have a case (I grudingly admit), but I wouldn't really be inclined to adjust because

i) We are only talking about the difference between 300 and 500 I assume, I can't believe it's going to be a big imp difference.

ii) It's North who gave West the (possible) information by not dropping the curtain or indeed by bothering to ask about the 3C bid at all; as soon as he sees his hand and dummy he knows it's a singleton lead, so why bother asking? Why not save up the TD call for later, it's not going to change the final contract.

North could have avoided the club ruff double dummy, however that would have run the risk of 800 (win the club, play a spade. West wins and gives East a club ruff. East crosses to West's top diamond honour who gives another club ruff)

p.s. isn't there a time limit for appeals?

[hotShot]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2008, 03:47 PM, said:

Now it's a new problem. North/South claim West shouldn't have given East a club ruff. They say he had UI from North calling the director when East said 3♣ was natural (after being asked by North wothout dropping the curtain). What now?

One would need to know more about the played cards, when West got to trick.
The question is, what alternative does West have?
If a round of ♥ was played, West can't play ♥.
If 2 rounds of ♦ have been played, West won't play ♦.
etc.

What legal information does West have:

0) Beginners play the suit partner lead.

1) West holds 5♣. After trick 1 he knows about 10 cards.

2) ♦ split 2-2 or 3-2.

3) East dbled. => East has some♥ and/or Quicktricks. East did not fear that N/S run to a makable ♠ contract, so he probably needs some ♠.

4) Partner lead the ♣Q and North followed suit.

5) North showed ♥ preference, and partner seems to have some, so the ♥length of North seems limited to 4-5. He can hold 2-3♦. If he held ♣ single, he has to hold 6-4 ♠. If the ♠ are longer than the ♥ would he not give ♠ preference?

6) On the table, he could see ♣AKT. So East would have lead from ♣QJ98.
He should have better leads available to dbl 4♥.

7) West has information from the previous tricks, here it is important to know if E/W got their ♦AK already. If so, West knows that there where other good leads available.

West has legal information, that something is strange with the ♠ length of North and the ♣ length of East. North got to have more than one ♣ and East has to have something in ♠ leading to ♣ to short to bid.
West can assume that East played the ♣Q for a reason, even if he can't see it.

So I won't adjust here. (But perhaps I will now be forced to give N/S their money back....)