[Simplicity]

Scoring: MP

1♥-X-2NT*-4♠
AP

---

2NT was alerted and explained as a game forcing 3+ card raise.

Result 4S -2 NS -100

At the end of the hand East says to her partner that she has misexplained the 2NT bid and that after a double it only shows a 3 card limit raise. West agrees and states that she had missed the double.

South calls the TD and says that had he been correctly informed he would have only bid 3♠, what say you?

[RMB1]

I'm sceptical. But if I can find players who would bid 3♠ with the correct explanation then I would adjust; not necessarily to 100% of 3♠-1.

[gordontd]

Simplicity, on Apr 21 2010, 04:15 PM, said:

South calls the TD and says that had he been correctly informed he would have only bid 3♠, what say you?

Did he explain why?

[aguahombre]

RMB1, on Apr 21 2010, 09:24 AM, said:

I'm sceptical. But if I can find players who would bid 3♠ with the correct explanation then I would adjust; not necessarily to 100% of 3♠-1.

skeptical? You are more polite, and would have handled it in a more dignified manor than I would. Probably wouldn't be good for my hypothetical directing career to just say, "That's horse sh--".

[jdonn]

I don't think it's so unbelievable. If 2NT was a 4 card raise it might be different of course.

Poll some players.

[helene_t]

Makes some sense. She thinks EW are in a GF so she won't be able to buy the contract in 3♠ (unless they double it). When they are not in a GF, 4♠ may be unnecessary, and is unlikely to lift them to the 5-level.

[Simplicity]

South reasoned that given the opponents were in a GF, 4♠ would be the best bid to put some pressure on as to double or bid on.

With the correct information South felt he could afford to bid a quiet 3♠.

If you were to conclude that bidding 3♠ was reasonable, what score would you assign?

[aguahombre]

---

Free shot for South. No director call if 4S works. Or if West would not bid 4H, 3S might score less than 4 on some typical layouts.

[jdonn]

aguahombre, on Apr 21 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

Free shot for South. No director call if 4S works.

Too bad for EW, that's what they get for misexplaining their bids! South didn't ask for that to happen so he gets the benefit of the doubt.

Anyway that example is silly as after 3♠ by south west will bid 4♥ and NS will bid 4♠ anyway.

[aguahombre]

That is interesting. North makes a T/O double; he has what a classic t/o double looks like; his partner bids 3S. So, just in case partner didn't know he had a t/o double, he will bid 4S.

[jdonn]

Did I say north would be the one to raise? And have you ever kept track of how many of your takeout doubles are exactly 4441? And do you actually have anything to offer to this question other than an irrelevent and stupid digression?

[aguahombre]

I guess not. As stated, if West would not bid 4H on some layouts, North is the only player available to raise. South is not allowed to raise after 3 passes.

[RMB1]

I was skeptical because I thought South would want to be in game opposite a take-out double regardless of what the opponents were up to.

In suggesting an adjustment to some of 3♠-1, I had neglected that West thought 2NT was game forcing and I think with a minimum he won't do anything but bid 4♥ over 3♠. I don't think NS will double 4♥ and I think South will often go on to 4♠. So there is at least one other auction which reproduces the table result (1♥ X 2NT 3♠ 4♥ P P 4♠) and one that reaches a different contract (1♥ X 2NT 3♠ 4♥ P P P). So perhaps NS are due some (<50%) proportion of 4♥ - 1.

[bluejak]

aguahombre, on Apr 21 2010, 05:22 PM, said:

Free shot for South.  No director call if 4S works.  Or if West would not bid 4H, 3S might score less than 4 on some typical layouts.

Apart from the fact that alleged free shots are neither free nor illegal, how on earth can South know that the explanation is wrong so this is the moment to try to gain advantage?

[jeremy69]

Quote

than an irrelevent and stupid digression?

If you are going to insult people you ought to spell the abuse correctly(irrelevant that is)!

EW caused the problem in the first place. If NS had known what was going on they might have chosen to defend 4H so should receive some of that score. I would make it less than half(say 20-30%) because I think South would have been unwilling to defend 4H most of the time

[jdonn]

jeremy69, on Apr 22 2010, 05:40 AM, said:

EW caused the problem in the first place. If NS had known what was going on they might have chosen to defend 4H so should receive some of that score. I would make it less than half(say 20-30%) because I think South would have been unwilling to defend 4H most of the time

Which of EW is going to bid 4♥ over 3♠? Looks like neither to me...

[jallerton]

As Robin explained earlier, West was under the impression that East had forced to game. With ♠Jxx, would West have much interest in defending 3♠x at unfavourable vulnerability? If not, presumably West would bid 4♥ over 3♠ from South.

[jdonn]

jallerton, on Apr 22 2010, 05:47 PM, said:

As Robin explained earlier, West was under the impression that East had forced to game.  With ♠Jxx, would West have much interest in defending 3♠x at unfavourable vulnerability?  If not, presumably West would bid 4♥ over 3♠ from South.

If west thought they were in a game force it should be considered that west might make what to him is a forcing pass, either in case east could bid 3NT, or in case east could double, or because bidding shows a better or more offensive hand to them. Or since west thought 2NT was jacoby they might have the agreement that bidding right away say something about a spade control. There are so many reasons west might pass.

It's far too simplistic to say "they are forced to game so west will just bid game". At the very least it should be looked into whether they have any agreements after interference over jacoby 2NT. If they don't maybe it's time to poll some peers of west with the auction as west perceived it.

[dburn]

If I had those West cards and thought I were in a game force I would routinely pass, expecting this to show a mildly slam-suitable hand with nothing clear-cut to do for the moment. With a hand more suitable for slam I would bid something other than 4♥ (maybe 3NT should be a spade control-bid, but that is for the Rexfords of this world); with a hand less suitable for slam I would bid 4♥ or double (penalty).

Still, not everyone bids like me. Certainly this South doesn't bid like me - I would bid 4♠ in the given auction whatever 2NT meant. But if he is telling the truth, he has lucked into a situation in which it might really have gone 3♠-all pass, and some weight should be given to that.

[nige1]

bluejak, on Apr 21 2010, 08:37 PM, said:

Apart from the fact that alleged free shots are neither free nor illegal, how on earth can South know that the explanation is wrong so this is the moment to try to gain advantage?

Agree with Bluejack