[gwnn]

if you are (by system regulations) banned from bidding 4♥ on this hand in the first round, I think best would be 3♣ or 3♦, not 2♠ or 2NT. This is unless you have some well-defined rule with your partner that 3m then 4♥ shows uncertainty wrt strain which you should have but almost nobody does (neither do I).

[Vampyr]

gnasher, on Dec 19 2009, 10:58 AM, said:

Vampyr, on Dec 19 2009, 06:47 AM, said:

Interesting. The auction has continued without penalty, but if you (partner of the spade bidder) accept partner's "invitation" will you be ruled to have gained from the infraction?

I don't think so. When the insufficient bid is accepted, it is treated as legal.

Law 27D ("If following the application of B1 the Director judges at the end of the play that without assistance gained through the infraction the outcome of the board could well have been different ...") relates only to an insufficient bid that was corrected.

Law 23 ("Awareness of potential damage done") relates to an advantage gained "through the irregularity". Here the advantage is gained as a result of the opponent's decision to accept the insufficient bid.

I agree with your first point -- I should have read the Law. But I strongly disagree with your second one.

You cannot say that an advantage is gained by the opponent's acceptance of the insufficient bid. There should be no real risk to the opponent's exercising his rights -- he did not create the situation, but he is forced to do something. The irregularity is the 3♠ bid, and it is this which allows the partnership to have a cooperative auction to 4♠.

So I think that this is in fact a good example of a L23 case, and the fact that there is no risk to the offender (if he has to he will just try 4♠ himself) means that I will keep a careful eye on this player in future.

[whereagles]

hmm.. guys, I meant

2♥ pass 3♥ 3♠

of course

[Vampyr]

whereagles, on Dec 20 2009, 09:10 PM, said:

hmm.. guys, I meant

2♥ pass 3♥ 3♠

of course

But you have opened up an interesting can of worms!

[Phil]

I farted around twice this week with big fits:

1. Pard opened 2♦ w/w mps, RHO x'd and I held Txx Ax JT9xxx xx. 5♦ looks normal in spite of the plethora of losers but I hated my LHO who prides himself on being a 'scientist' (as well as a jerk). So I threw 2♥ at him. He looked at AKxxx Kxxx void xxxx and after interrogating my pard on what 2♥ showed settled for 4♠. Dummy came down with xx QJ9xx Ax (yeah pard LOL) AKQJ. -650 was a near top.

2. Yesterday I held JTxxxx xx xx Axx and heard (1♥) - 2♥ - (2♠). I decided to 'walk it' with 3♠ thinking there would be no way they would stop.

The music stopped at 3♠ and I chalked up +230 across from Axxxx x AKxxx xx. Partner was not pleased

In general I think it is better to bid to the limit of your fit. 4♥ looks right. They haven't bid 4♠ yet and I can take the push later.

[PaulLanier]

5♥, after a Deal 3.1 analysis, found at:
http://jplan.org/Hey...060analysis.pdf
This time I used the standard Deal table format and verified the results statistically.

On most of the hands, 5♥X goes for less than what EW can make. On most of the hands NS make only 3♥. The duplication of values and length in hearts lowers the expectation for NS.

This is also an interesting LOTT hand. Expected Total Trumps are 19+ (EW rate to have 8-9 spades, 8-9 diamonds, and 7 clubs, so for LOTT a trump or two is added for the EW two-suited fit). So it makes sense that most of the time, if NS make only 3♥ (9 tricks), then EW expect 10-11 tricks.

Regards, Paul