BBO Discussion Forums: Forgotten Transfer - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Forgotten Transfer

#1 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-25, 06:00


London Super League Div II; IMPs; 24 board match converted to VPs; Table result 5H=

NS complained at the end of the hand that the auction was not entirely kosher and gave these details. 4H was alerted and explained as a transfer to spades. The actual agreement was that 4H was natural and terminal and the CC was clear on this. 4C and 4D were shown on the card as transfers to and respectively (either terminal or s-try). North, who gave these details - I was not present, confirmed that there was nothing in the body language or tempo of EW which indicated that a wheel had come off. The TD ruled that the result stood as did two eminent L&E members who were polled for an opinion.

What does this forum think?
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#2 User is offline   wank 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,866
  • Joined: 2008-July-13

Posted 2016-November-25, 06:32

result stands.

the alert removes all doubt about how east has interpreted 4H, but there really isn't any doubt to remove. to anyone outside the realms of these forums, it's totally obvious that partner's taken your 4H as a transfer when he, having opened a weak no trump, removes 4H to 4S.
0

#3 User is offline   Kungsgeten 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 942
  • Joined: 2012-April-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Skövde, Sweden

Posted 2016-November-25, 07:27

West has UI due to the alert and explanation of 4H. Still if you bid 4H as a terminating bid, and a weak NT opener removes is to 4S, what can opener have?

Now when you have UI you can not, among options, choose one suggested by the UI. The UI suggests that the winning bid is to bid 5H. Does west have any options here though? 4S can not be natural (unless partner has psyched?), and 4S as a super-accept of hearts seems a bit strange too since responder could have bid something else with a slam try. I can not see any opening hand that would bid anything else other than pass, and there's no other possible strain, so I'd accept the 5H bid. You could ask other players of the same calibre what they would bid in the same situation, but most would probably interpret 4S as if partner erred, and bid 5H.

East does not have any UI, so he may bid whatever he wants -- passing 5H is okay. However if West reacted in a bad way when 4H was explained (sighs, comments, becoming irritated), then East have UI. Let's say they play voidwood/exclusion for instance, now this particular sequence may not have been discussed in the partnership, but it isn't too much of a stretch to interpret a transfer to the four level, followed by a new suit at the five level, as an exclusion bid. In this case the final contract will likely be 6H, 6S or 6NT.
0

#4 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-25, 08:01

View PostKungsgeten, on 2016-November-25, 07:27, said:

West has UI due to the alert and explanation of 4H. Still if you bid 4H as a terminating bid, and a weak NT opener removes is to 4S, what can opener have?

Now when you have UI you can not, among options, choose one suggested by the UI. The UI suggests that the winning bid is to bid 5H. Does west have any options here though? 4S can not be natural (unless partner has psyched?), and 4S as a super-accept of hearts seems a bit strange too since responder could have bid something else with a slam try. I can not see any opening hand that would bid anything else other than pass, and there's no other possible strain, so I'd accept the 5H bid. You could ask other players of the same calibre what they would bid in the same situation, but most would probably interpret 4S as if partner erred, and bid 5H.

East does not have any UI, so he may bid whatever he wants -- passing 5H is okay. However if West reacted in a bad way when 4H was explained (sighs, comments, becoming irritated), then East have UI. Let's say they play voidwood/exclusion for instance, now this particular sequence may not have been discussed in the partnership, but it isn't too much of a stretch to interpret a transfer to the four level, followed by a new suit at the five level, as an exclusion bid. In this case the final contract will likely be 6H, 6S or 6NT.

I totally agree that you know a wheel has come off, but you also know (from the alert) that partner will interpret a 5-level bid as a slam-try in spades. The question therefore is whether pass is an LA. If partner has KJxxx xx KQx KQx, you will make 4S but not 5H. If you were behind screens, which is the usual test, you might think as follows:

"The pillock. He has clearly taken 4H to be a transfer. Now if we bid 5H he may well think it is a slam-try in spades, possibly without a minor-suit control, and that won't work. Pass is a reasonable shot, as it may make even opposite as little as KJxx xx Kxx AQxx or the like, while 5H will need quite a lot, even if he passes it, which he won't." The only way to establish what is an LA is to poll peers of West advising them that you are playing with screens and ask them what they would bid now. I bet that the requisite number would pass. And I think all of us are happy that 5H is demonstrably suggested. The other thing about 5H is that it is the bid most likely to jog partner's memory. Is that permitted?
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#5 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-25, 08:07

View Postwank, on 2016-November-25, 06:32, said:

result stands.

the alert removes all doubt about how east has interpreted 4H, but there really isn't any doubt to remove. to anyone outside the realms of these forums, it's totally obvious that partner's taken your 4H as a transfer when he, having opened a weak no trump, removes 4H to 4S.

Everyone agrees with the second sentence, but that has not even scratched the surface of the problem. Is Pass now an LA?
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#6 User is offline   wank 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,866
  • Joined: 2008-July-13

Posted 2016-November-25, 08:25

View Postlamford, on 2016-November-25, 08:07, said:

Everyone agrees with the second sentence, but that has not even scratched the surface of the problem. Is Pass now an LA?

anyone saying that partner would take 5H as a slam try for spades, is effectively saying 5H is not demonstrably suggested and that passing 4S perforce is.
1

#7 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-25, 08:57

View Postwank, on 2016-November-25, 08:25, said:

anyone saying that partner would take 5H as a slam try for spades, is effectively saying 5H is not demonstrably suggested and that passing 4S perforce is.

This particular pair were obviously on the same length. 5H just said "you have forgotten again, partner", so was demonstrably suggested. I am surprised that West did not fold his hands and write down the contract, but then I am always cynical as everyone knows. LAs are decided separately to whether they are demonstrably suggested. Pass is an LA because partner might bid on over 5H and it is the last chance of a plus score. 4S might well make and 5H might well go off.

5H is demonstrably suggested by the UI, because the alert has told you that partner is not making a slam-try with a super maximum, has not found an ace, and is very unlikely to have psyched, the only other possibilities from the AI (other than the actual one that he forgot that 4H was natural). You also now know that he does not have xx AKxx xx AKTxx from the UI (a hand he has clearly forgotten to upgrade; or make the king of clubs the queen when slam is still good), so you do not cue 5D. I have been in far worse grands.

Actually I think 5D is an LA, and not bidding it is demonstrably suggested. It shows a diamond control in a good hand for the bidding, without a club control. Partner is now too good to jump to 6S ... Another hand consistent with partner's bidding is Kxx AKxx xx ATxx when slam is almost against the wall. [Eliminate the pointed suits and run the jack of clubs].
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#8 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,128
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2016-November-25, 09:32

Lamford writes "London Super League Div II; IMPs; 24 board match converted to VPs; Table result 5H=
NS complained at the end of the hand that the auction was not entirely kosher and gave these details. 4H was alerted and explained as a transfer to spades. The actual agreement was that 4H was natural and terminal and the CC was clear on this. 4C and 4D were shown on the card as transfers to and respectively (either terminal or s-try). North, who gave these details - I was not present, confirmed that there was nothing in the body language or tempo of EW which indicated that a wheel had come off. The TD ruled that the result stood as did two eminent L&E members who were polled for an opinion."

From East's view-point, ostensibly, West showed a one-suiter and then made a peculiar slam-try in . East seems to have judged it more likely that West had a one-suiter but had forgotten the system. We're assured that West gave no unauthorised information (body language/ BIT) to East to suggest that a wheel had come off, so, IMO, the director's "result stands" ruling is correct.ir

IMO such incidents also present a disclosure problem. East guessed West's real intentions because, for their partnership, if a wheel had come off, then it was likely that 4 was intended as natural. (For example, the default,for a different partnership, might be a transfer to ). This inference might be ;less obvious to opponents.

0

#9 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2016-November-25, 10:57

The question is: Did east call the director (as he must)and say that he had given a misexplanation. Otherwise I cannot understand why he passed 5.

Give West : AKQ8653 - KQT98 J and 6 rolls in while 5 has little chance.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

#10 User is offline   steve2005 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,148
  • Joined: 2010-April-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada
  • Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2016-November-25, 13:46

Remember poster is playing 4 as a transfer to . Of course maybe they don't remember this either lol.
Presumably any slam hand would go thru 4, so clearly 5 is a wheels have come off auction not a slam try.
Sarcasm is a state of mind
0

#11 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,562
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-November-25, 14:55

Is there unauthorized information? Yes there is; the alert and explanation of 4 as a transfer to spades is UI to West.
Does West have logical alternatives to bidding 5? Absent the UI, 4 from a weak 1NT opener over a natural 4 signoff makes no sense at all, although possibly I suppose it might be Kickback, so what would West do if he had no UI? I can't think of anything other than bid 5, even if 4 might be (or is) Kickback. Is pass a LA? 5? Maybe, maybe not. If pass is a LA, I suppose 5 demonstrably could be suggested over pass by the UI (after all, bidding anything at this point could get them in deeper). I would like to hear the reasoning of the TD and the two eminent L&E members that led to "result stands".

I don't think we should be looking at East's pass of 5, given positive evidence that East has no UI and on the assumption that 5 was a legal bid.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#12 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-26, 07:32

I agree with all posters that we have to accept that East has no UI and can bid anything he likes; although the pass of 5H stinks of UI, our detectors did not find any traces of it.
.
However, I do not agree at all that 5H is normal. Those polled on Facebook chose a mixture of 4NT and 5D predominantly, with 4NT hoping partner would bid 5H in reply - a sort of exit plan! My thoughts, posted there, are these:

I think the LAs are Pass, 4NT, 5D and 5H. The first assumes partner has psyched 1NT and cannot be right. The second is presumably either natural or, more normally, RKCB for hearts. If partner has three keys, I think I want to be in slam as he has something like Kxx AKxx xx ATxx when he thought he had some sort of super-accept (after all we wanted to play in 4H if his AK of hearts was some trash elsewhere). Or he might even be making a Zia style cue with a low doubleton spade, with a big heart fit. 5D looks the right bid. No club control, two bullets, and Blackwood too committal. 5H is very conservative; (why did partner take the trouble to move over 4H?), and I think is wrong. What is demonstrably suggested? Well I think 5H is by the alert (yes there was one, but pollees are not told that), which tells you partner is not making a slam try, Allowing 5H to stand is a poor decision, and, given that partner does have a max with AK of clubs, I would regard this as a completely routine adjustment to 6Sx-3, despite the seeming eminence of the TD and the L&E members consulted. I would have also given a PP for the 5H bid which did not carefully avoid taking any advantage of the UI (Law 73). I understand that the opponents may now have appealed. And I agree with dburn that "exit plans" are illegal. Exit must mean exit.
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#13 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,417
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2016-November-28, 08:28

View Postweejonnie, on 2016-November-25, 10:57, said:

I cannot understand why he passed 5.

He remembered in the meantime that 4H was natural, not a transfer. And, without UI, he is entitled to do that. If he had UI he could not.
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users