[Dragan]

BBO tournement

Scoring: IMP

---

bidding :

N E S W
Pass Pass Pass 1♣
Pass 1♦ X 3NT
Pass Pass Pass

Facts:
1) Nothing is alerted
2) After bidding is finished opps are asked about meaning of 1♦ response, answer we got is : 11+HCP's
3) Result 3NT+1
4) N/S apealed that 3nt is maded with information given with X, which can not be given if 1D is alerted.
5) director leave reached result

What do you think ?

With Regards, Dragan

[Brandal]

No adjust gets my vote.



why can't 1D be X'ed if alerted?

Don't see how 3NT can be defeated on wests hand anyway?

[inquiry]

I removed the names of the participants and a link to the hand, and the name of the director.

First, there is no adjustment necessary as 3NT is fine contract, and nothing illegal happened in a general sense.

Second, something slightly odd here has happened. West opened fourth in hand with 14 count and then leaped to three notrump (not even an invite to 3NT) opposite a passed hand. Perahps this is good judgment, partner has diamonds, I am going to get a major suit lead with the major suit cards well placed for me.

If West thougth this way, he was richly rewarded, he took a gamble and it won. But he was lucky to catch his partner with so much. Exchange club Ten for a small club, for examaple and this contract is in a world of hurt on a club lead.

I'm not even sure what ALERTS you expect to be given..maybe...

1C = 3+ clubs, we play 5 card majors
1D = I ahve some diamonds and enought to respond
3NT = balance hand or running clubs, enough for game oppoistie 1D response.

In other words, the bidding was normal except that WEST was a signficanlty light for his action. Perhaps you are suggesting that 3NT is an impossible bid, adn something funny was going on. This is one of three reasons I removed the names and the link. (it could also be considered a slam on the director for not ruling your way, so his name goes away... we can diccuss the merit of the situation without knowing any names).

IF thiis pair always bids like this and is always lucky, then you might have something (this "statement by me is the thrid reason, as I don't want to start a witch hunt by saying htis with their names exposed). But maybe EW are bad bidder and despite thsi lucky hand they came in dead last. Maybe they are novices, or maybe they are pro's and WEST was swinging for the fence needing a board or two in a short tourneyment. No way to know looking at one hand. And surely no way for the director to know.

So my ruling, the result stands, and I would have made a note to have a look at EW profile (expert? beginner?), and how they were doig in the tourney before this (average? behind? way ahead?). If htye beginners, I forget it. I Fhtey experts and they behind or average I would take note (problalbly tryig to catch up), if htey are experts and they are way ahead before this hand, I would be looking at a lot more of their hands. IF for nothing else to learn from the masters, or to see if they are being completely honest.

Ben

[Brandal]

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 11:55 AM, said:

Second, something slightly odd here has happened. West opened fourth in hand with 14 count and then leaped to three notrump (not even an invite to 3NT) opposite a passed hand.

Ben

Opps were given exact count 11+ on passed hand.....probably 11 HCP and 4+ D suit.
I never get to know exact count

3NT seems appropriate opposite 11,after the X major game seems unlikely.

[inquiry]

Brandal, on Sep 29 2004, 01:46 PM, said:

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 11:55 AM, said:

Second, something slightly odd here has happened. West opened fourth in hand with 14 count and then leaped to three notrump (not even an invite to 3NT) opposite a passed hand.

Ben

Opps were given exact count 11+ on passed hand.....probably 11 HCP and 4+ D suit.
I never get to know exact count

3NT seems appropriate opposite 11,after the X major game seems unlikely.

[FONT=Courier]

Scoring: IMP


West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 Pass  1♣    Pass  1♦
 Pass  1♠    Pass  Pass
 1NT   Pass  2♦    Pass
 Pass  Pass  

---

hmmm, are we sure we got this right? 1♦ was explained as 11+ hcp by a passed hand? Seems odd agreement. And, here is a hand from this same pair. Once again a passed hand gives a one diamond response to 1C....

Instead of 11+ hcp, the responder has 3. Instead of leaping to game with 14 hcp and a nice club suit this time, opener just rebids 1S. Seems insonsistent. I wonder it the opponents asked what 1D was and the diamind bidder explained what he had rather than his agreement?

Ben

[SirSatai]

i was co-director of that tourney and i did not accept to adjust also because it is not necesery 3NT is normal and good bid if it happaens again i think i dont adjust again also double to 1♦ was verry risky bid and there was no alert also dragan was asking everything but forget to explain or alert his double also

[Brandal]

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 01:52 PM, said:

Brandal, on Sep 29 2004, 01:46 PM, said:

inquiry, on Sep 29 2004, 11:55 AM, said:

Second, something slightly odd here has happened. West opened fourth in hand with 14 count and then leaped to three notrump (not even an invite to 3NT) opposite a passed hand.

Ben

Opps were given exact count 11+ on passed hand.....probably 11 HCP and 4+ D suit.
I never get to know exact count

3NT seems appropriate opposite 11,after the X major game seems unlikely.

hmmm, are we sure we got this right? 1♦ was explained as 11+ hcp by a passed hand? Seems odd agreement. And, here is a hand from this same pair. Once again a passed hand gives a one diamond response to 1C....

Instead of 11+ hcp, the responder has 3. Instead of leaping to game with 14 hcp and a nice club suit this time, opener just rebids 1S. Seems insonsistent. I wonder it the opponents asked what 1D was and the diamind bidder explained what he had rather than his agreement?

Ben

According to the "Facts" given,second fact:
2) After bidding is finished opps are asked about meaning of 1D response, answer we got is : 11+HCP's

And he was passed hand---pass-pass-pass-1C

[Maaa]

The question I see prior is "Adjust or not adjust?", but i do not see the option for 'not adjust' in that poll

Furthermore I do not understand why missed alert (and we miss it here for sure!) shalll automatically result in an adjustment?
Is there a demage which occured? What would an alert change in opponents bidding/play? Correct - in bidding and play of the not offending pair!
So, is there a demage ?
"4) N/S apealed that 3nt is maded with information given with X, which can not be given if 1D is alerted."
I would say if South really sells all NS values with this X, there may be one, but c´mon, i dont think this is the fact on this hand, so the double cant be the only reason why EW fullfill their declared contract.

I would also let the score stand but in a real tourney EW would get a procedual penalty, what is inpossible today at BBO. This makes TDrs job much harder - it is now on him to find the golden middle in his ruling, not on the Laws Of Duplicate Bridge


Greetings, M.

[sfbp]

Quote

hmmm, are we sure we got this right? 1♦ was explained as 11+ hcp by a passed hand? Seems odd agreement. And, here is a hand from this same pair. Once again a passed hand gives a one diamond response to 1C....

Instead of 11+ hcp, the responder has 3. Instead of leaping to game with 14 hcp and a nice club suit this time, opener just rebids 1S. Seems insonsistent. I wonder it the opponents asked what 1D was and the diamind bidder explained what he had rather than his agreement?

Ben

I think I can see where you are going. I agree that the 1♦ responder simply told what his hand was when asked for explanation.

That's a far cry from having an agreement, which your second example seems to indicate that they do not (it's 3rd seat instead of 4th seat but does anyone seriously suggest that's the difference?).

This pair looks to me like a candidate for further tracking. Like the pair that alerted the same bid (1♠ 1NT) as forcing and non-forcing in two successive hands against me.

Stephen