[mr1303]

---

With North dealer, the bidding goes as follows:

2H* X P 2NT
P 4S All Pass

2H was alerted as Ekrens, showing a weak hand with at least 5-4 in the majors, either way (the partnership agreement). 4S goes 2 off.

At the end of the hand, West claims that she would have passed with the correct information.

How do you rule?

[RMB1]

mr1303, on Feb 28 2010, 11:38 AM, said:

..., showing a weak hand with at least 5-4 in the majors, either way (the partnership agreement).

As presented, I rule "misbid" not "misexplanation". The pass of 2♥X does not suggest the explanation was wrong. So no misinformation, no adjustment.

[shyams]

I think some questions need to be answered first:

1. What were N/S playing? What did their CC say? I presume it was Ekrens etc
2. Did TD ask N why he bid 2H? Did he assume it to mean 5♥+4card minor?
  a. If yes, the answer to #1 becomes more relevant -- misbid vs MI.
  b. If N says he knows they play Ekrens but he improvised (or something like that); the TD line of questioning will be to N/S asking them how often they do that.

[gordontd]

I agree that there's no evidence of misinformation, so no reason for adjustment, but I'm also intrigued by the argument that's presented by the EW side in the original post:

EW bid to 4♠ when they thought that North had spades as well as hearts, but they would have defended 2♥ if they thought that North only had hearts?

[vigfus]

Table score stands.
I do not understand at all West's argument of making PASS knowing North having weak 2 in hearts.

[peachy]

Some sort of recorder system might help here. If NS have made a habit of bidding 2H with either a weak two in H, 5-4/4-5 majors, or H+another suit, instead of using 2H as system says, then the pattern of such should be established. As it is, this is a misbid, lacking evidence of anything else.

Score stands. I don't really buy EW arguments...

[bluejak]

"If they have spades, I want to play in our spade fit. But if they do not, I don't."

<puzzled of Worthing> "Please, Mr Bridge, could you explain this?"

[barmar]

West didn't bid spades, East did. I assume West's 2NT was Lebensohl, intending to bid 3♦ non-constructive.

But I still don't believe West's claim she would have converted the takeout double if she'd received a different explanation.

[jdonn]

Since the OP told us the partnership agreement was correctly explained, I assume we are just speculating about west's (dubious) claim out of curiosity since we shouldn't even get that far into the ruling.

Also I feel it worth mentioning I don't think west is necessarily dishonest, I think he probably just is that bad. I mean look at what his partner bid, and given the explanation too!

[mr1303]

The agreement was specifically:

2D Multi
2H Ekrens
2S Lucas

but North forgot, being used to playing 2H & 2S as Lucas

Incidentally, 2NT wasn't alerted, and I don't think this particular EW partnership were particularly experienced with such conventions such as Lebensohl. I think West was attempting revenge following a director call by me (as South) following an insufficient bid. She didn't actually call the director, just wanted a chance to moan.