[lamford]

---

Matchpoints. J♠ lead, result 3NT+2.

This was an odd occurrence at a local club a couple of nights ago. South was, ridiculously, attempting to be politically correct when announcing 2♣ as "Stayperson". East's first language was not English, but he claimed that he spoke enough to recognise "Stayman" and would have chanced a double if he had known it was that. South thought he could have doubled anyway, but East said that he did not know what 2♣ was and did not want to give UI by asking. As you can see 3NT fails on a club lead.

How do you rule?

[lamford]

Sorry, I have no idea how this was posted six times; and only the moderator can delete, I am told.

[han]

If bad humor was penalizable, I would have been banned long ago.

If you don't know the language well and something happens that you don't understand, ask. "Sorry, I don't understand" does not give UI. Bridge is a game where you always want to know what's happening at the table.

I don't know your local rules, but I assume that only stayman is announcable, other conventional meanings of 2C are alertable? If so, knowing the rules would have helped east.

Further, nobody plays 1NT - 2C as natural, and when you hold KQJ103 of clubs, that's a further indication that 2C is not natural. I'd risk asking what Stayperson means. If it turns out that 2C is natural, no harm done.

[han]

In general I think that the story "this bid was alerted but I didn't want to ask what it meant for fear of giving UI. Had I known what it meant I would have done something different" is not a convincing argument.

[lamford]

han, on 2011-June-11, 03:59, said:

I don't know your local rules, but I assume that only stayman is announcable, other conventional meanings of 2C are alertable? If so, knowing the rules would have helped east.

Indeed, Stayman is announced and other meanings are alerted. But could South have known that the infraction of the wrong announcement could work to his benefit by misleading an opponent?

[ahydra]

lamford, on 2011-June-11, 04:15, said:

Indeed, Stayman is announced and other meanings are alerted. But could South have known that the infraction of the wrong announcement could work to his benefit by misleading an opponent?

To put it simply: yes.

Agree with han, so table result stands, but PP for south for not announcing properly. [Unless it turns out he was playing a convention called Stayperson, in which case the PP is for not alerting properly]

ahydra

[blackshoe]

lamford, on 2011-June-11, 03:45, said:

Sorry, I have no idea how this was posted six times; and only the moderator can delete, I am told.

Fixed.

[axman]

lamford, on 2011-June-11, 03:34, said:

---

Matchpoints. J♠ lead, result 3NT+2.

This was an odd occurrence at a local club a couple of nights ago. South was, ridiculously, attempting to be politically correct when announcing 2♣ as "Stayperson". East's first language was not English, but he claimed that he spoke enough to recognise "Stayman" and would have chanced a double if he had known it was that. South thought he could have doubled anyway, but East said that he did not know what 2♣ was and did not want to give UI by asking. As you can see 3NT fails on a club lead.

How do you rule?

2CXX by N= +760

[nige1]

axman, on 2011-June-11, 06:14, said:

2CXX by N= +760

[gordontd]

ahydra, on 2011-June-11, 05:01, said:

PP for south for not announcing properly. [Unless it turns out he was playing a convention called Stayperson,

Off topic (without any guarantee of authenticity): there's a man called Stan Ritter whose eponymous 2C convention (asking for the majors but also for range, in response to 1NT) is played by a large-ish group of players mainly in Essex.

Someone playing against Stan alerted his partner's 2C response to 1NT, and described it on request as "Modified Ritter". "Oh really" said Stan, "what's that?" The player gave a lengthy description of the convention and it's responses, to which Stan said "that sounds a lot like Stayman". "Yes, it does" came the reply.