[Free]

With NS Vulnerable and EW NV the bidding starts (Matchpoints):
East - South - West - North
pass - 1♦ - 3♥ -

Now North asks East what 3♥ means and it's explained as "weak with long ♥". Stupid question, I know, but some people need confirmation... It goes on:
East - South - West - North
pass - 1♦ - 3♥ - 3♠
pass - 4♠ - 5♥ - pass
pass - Dbl - pass - pass
pass

Now West says he thought 3♥ was strong!

- Was west allowed to bid on after partner's explanation? As far as I know West is still allowed to bid, but may not use the information told by his partner. So what is the normal bid with Jxxx-AKxxxx-AK-A in this situation after 4♠?
- Would any TD allow a correction, or to set the contract back to 4♠, 4♠ doubled, or 5♥ undoubled?

[badderzboy]

Is there UI/MI? Yes

Was there Damage? Yes if 5♥ X makes

Is the 5♥ bid influenced by the UI ? No,
The 5♥ knows nothing useful by the MI and the bidding suggests his ptr is light in ♠s.

Is the 3♠ and double influenced by the MI ? yes

First, Did he make 5♥x? If yes , I would rollback to 3♥ making +2 I guess your partner would not bid 3♠ with the right explanation and West is also going to pass and so 5♥x is never the final contract?

If No then you get the score of the double as you would never be in ♠s

Steve

[Gerben42]

Ehh... weird.

I would have doubled 4♠ for what it's worth.

There are two issues here.

1. Did the MI suggest any bid over another for West? I don't think so. The fact that East didn't get his bid and then passed does not suggest 5♥ over Double since if East has a weak hand with ♥ fit he would have bid 4♥ either way.

2. Would NS have bid differently had they known the correct explanation? I don't think so either. What if East has ♦AK and ♣A instead of West?

So no adjustment. Did it make?

[luke warm]

Free, on Aug 12 2006, 06:43 AM, said:

With NS Vulnerable and EW NV the bidding starts (Matchpoints):
East - South - West - North
pass - 1♦ - 3♥ -

Now North asks East what 3♥ means and it's explained as "weak with long ♥". Stupid question, I know, but some people need confirmation... It goes on:
East - South - West - North
pass - 1♦ - 3♥ - 3♠
pass - 4♠ - 5♥ - pass
pass - Dbl - pass - pass
pass

Now West says he thought 3♥ was strong!

- Was west allowed to bid on after partner's explanation? As far as I know West is still allowed to bid, but may not use the information told by his partner. So what is the normal bid with Jxxx-AKxxxx-AK-A in this situation after 4♠?
- Would any TD allow a correction, or to set the contract back to 4♠, 4♠ doubled, or 5♥ undoubled?

i think west's bid would stand.. i think the TD would make the bid 5h not doubled

[hotShot]

This one is a little tricky, first the simple things.

1) What was the agreement?
We don't know so, so we can't find out if it was a missbid or a missinformation. If EW can prove that 3♥ was agreed to be weak, than we issue a psyche warning and the result stands (perhaps procedural penalty for not knowing the system). Otherwise we have to assume MI.

2) Would a correct information have changed north bidding?
We have to ask north, what he would have done. (System notes anyone?)
If north has a point in bidding differently (e.g. pass or bid 4♠ ) the TD needs to act (adjusted score depending on north new action). If north bids 3♠ anyway, we have to move on.

3) Would south bid 4♠ without the MI?
Again we have to check. If south would not bid 4♠, we might have to adjust the score. Possible scores are 4♥ (UI?) and 3♠.

4) West has the UI that east thinks he's weak with lots of hearts. East would pass even with invitatonal/openning strength over a weak 3♥, so he might have a little more for his pass. The fact that N,S are bidding and east's passing is AI to west. So if his hand is as strong as suggested by the bidding, there was probably no use of UI. But rebidding must be suggested strongly by west's hand to assume no UI used.

5) I don't think south would dbl without the MI, but i need to look at the hands to decide that. If dbl of a rebidding weak hand is suggested by south cards i would adjust score to 5♥ undoubled. If south hand does not strongly suggest to dbl, i might rule double shot score stands.

[helene_t]

I wouldn't adjust to 4♠ undoubled since it isn't an option for West to pass after 4♠. Well maybe it is, he's obviously a novice so everything is possible. Dificult to rule in such cases. The rules have been written with better players in mind.

I wouldn't adjust to 5♥ undoubled either since NS are probably in a forcing pass situation.

So result stands.

[Free]

Some more facts:
- 5♥ makes.
- 4♠ gets to 9 tricks.
- North says he would not have bid 3♠ if 3♥ was strong. He actually shouldn't have bid anyway.
- South would definetly not bid 4♠ even if north bid 3♠ if he knew 3♥ was strong (now he bid 4♠ under pressure, assuming a good hand from partner).
- South wouldn't double 5♥ with correct information.
- From a neutral point of view, EW should be playing 3♥ as weak with a long suit. It fits their other agreements (West - intermediate - said "2♥ is weak so I assumed 3♥ was strong"), but there was no CC available to confirm this.

[Gerben42]

Quote

- North says he would not have bid 3♠ if 3♥ was strong. He actually shouldn't have bid anyway.

This is always the kind of backwards reasoning. Even the meaning "strong" does not mean we can't have 4♠ and weak does not mean partner has a strong hand.

If that is West's logic I still don't adjust since I rule no misinformation as there was in fact no agreement. Just incompetence...

NS got unlucky that EW struck gold. Let me guess, NS were much stronger players than EW?

[awm]

I think table result has to stand. If E/W had an agreement that 3♥ was strong it would be a different matter. Certainly west should have indicated that 3♥ was "undiscussed," however since basically the whole world plays it as weak it's unlikely that "undiscussed" or "no agreement" would have convinced south to bid any differently.

[inquiry]

awm, on Aug 12 2006, 07:11 PM, said:

I think table result has to stand. If E/W had an agreement that 3♥ was strong it would be a different matter. Certainly west should have indicated that 3♥ was "undiscussed," however since basically the whole world plays it as weak it's unlikely that "undiscussed" or "no agreement" would have convinced south to bid any differently.

I think you might have missed that the overcaller is more likely to bid 5♥ than pass 4♠ if he finds out by UI that his partner thinks his bid was "weak".

I think roll back to 4♠ would be in order.

[neilkaz]

Having the result stand is not fair since as South stated and seems likely, he wouldn't have doubled if 3H was strong.

However, the 5H bid was made all on its own, and should stand, IMHO. The spade bidders both stretched their bids and certainly wouldn't have called 5S if 3H was strong.

Adjusting to 5H undoubled seems really clear to me.

However, every decision like this is thorny. .. neilkaz ..

[Flame]

Lets assume that west didnt hear his parner explains. West wouldnt pass 4S, he got too much, he would probebly double, now what would his partner do ? we dont see his hand but from the story im pretty sure he has the hand to correct to 5H, so nothing has changed and i would let the score stands.
The other question is whater there was a mistake in the explanation or the bid, if it was the explaning mistake, then we need to check whather to take off the last double.

[blackshoe]

There are two issues here. The first is one of MI. The explanation is MI if the partnership agreement is other than 'weak, long hearts". The second is one of UI. The explanation conveys the information that explainer misunderstood his partner's intent. That is UI. Demonstably, given that the bidder has a strong hand, the UI suggests he bid again. Pass is, IMO, a logical alternative. Therefore, if he bids, and that causes damage, the score should be adjusted.

TD is to assume, absent evidence to the contrary, MI rather than misbid. So says Law 75.

Looks to me like there was MI. There was also UI, and the use of UI when it suggested a call and there was an LA. All that says we adjust the score. I would adjust to 3 ♥ making however many it makes. Five, was it? Okay, there it is.

[Free]

Tnx everyone. I guess I'm still not sure what's the best ruling is since all of you come up with different results. But at least I won't get annoyed with another poor ruling from our club 'TD' who let the score stand.