[wyman]

ACBL, MP

---

N/S -470

N/S/E are flight A strat players with varying skill and experience levels
W plays 2 club games a week and does not play tournaments
Both partnerships are pick-up partnerships.

After 2D, west hems and haws but never alerts.
S makes a slighly out of tempo takeout X
After 2H, S asks west what 2D means, and west replies "im not sure, i think we might be playing Cappelletti". South takes east's c/c, reads it, and hands it to north.
Both c/c's (E/W) say Capp, incidentally.

Upon seeing dummy, N asks W what he whether he would have passed 2D. W says "no, I would have bid 2H."
East's comment on the matter was that never having discussed it, he believes XX is business and pass is no preference.
N/S think they were damaged by the misinformation and could have competed in clubs.

[TimG]

I think NS need to state what they would have done differently if informed correctly, not just say they could have competed in clubs. South was informed correctly before making the penalty double of 2♥, so I don't think a claim that she would want to change her double with the correct information carries much weight.

North had the correct explanation of the opponents' methods when he made his final pass. The "misinformation" that north held was that his partner was making a penalty double of 2♥. That misunderstanding was not a result of the failure to alert the 2♦ bid.

I don't see a case for adjustment.

[bluejak]

Nor me.

[gerry]

Adjust to 2♦X making however many tricks. I would have passed with the east cards as I play that pass is to play and XX is no pref, and in the absence of another clear cut agreement that is how an ethical player will act here. Presumably this east can only play in diamonds redoubled. Yeah right.

[Phil]

Split score anyone?

It seems West's failure to alert and the histrionics are UI to East. So 2♥ should not be allowed. Imagine an alert of 2♦ followed by a satisfied and confident pass by West conveying "I've got diamonds!" instead of the hemming and hawing + no alert.

However, NS don't get to keep their +500 in 2♦. They had a gross misunderstanding about the double of 2♥, so I think they get to keep their -470, no?

[wyman]

Phil, on 2010-December-10, 10:18, said:

Split score anyone?

It seems West's failure to alert and the histrionics are UI to East. So 2♥ should not be allowed. Imagine a satisfied and confident pass by West conveying "I've got diamonds!" instead of the hemming and hawing.

However, NS don't get to keep their +500 in 2♦. They had a gross misunderstanding about the double of 2♥, so I think they get to keep their -470, no?

Agree that a split score may be in order. The question is: which one?

Out of curiosity, what did the hemming and hawing of west, clearly uncomfortable and trying to remember the meaning of 2D, and clearly UI, suggest to East?

Would you assume that a player of west's caliber (65 y.o., plays 2x weekly in a club game, has ~300 MP) would have the agreement with *anyone*, let alone a pickup partner, to invert the meaning of pass and XX here? [pass = to play, XX = no preference]

Gerry said:

Quote

I would have passed with the east cards as I play that pass is to play and XX is no pref, and in the absence of another clear cut agreement that is how an ethical player will act here. Presumably this east can only play in diamonds redoubled. Yeah right.

In an expert field, I'd think this has a lot more merit. The question is how much merit it has in this situation and is essentially the basis for my question.

Thanks for your responses thus far; this is helpful.

[Phil]

In about four hours, I get my weekly dose of dealing with the ilk of player like West. I'm telling you that there is a way for west to transmit confidence about 2♦ to his partner, as well as ambivalence and discomfort.

In answer to your question, I think the discomfort transmits, "I've forgotten our agreement, so the ball is in your court, but in any event, I don't have diamonds".

[wyman]

Phil, on 2010-December-10, 10:51, said:

In about four hours, I get my weekly dose of dealing with the ilk of player like West. I'm telling you that there is a way for west to transmit confidence about 2♦ to his partner, as well as ambivalence and discomfort.

In answer to your question, I think the discomfort transmits, "I've forgotten our agreement, so the ball is in your court, but in any event, I don't have diamonds".

I see. So I suppose that my only outstanding question is whether or not -- on this auction, with this partnership -- pass is ever an LA for east.

edit: and I am jealous; I will still be working in 4 hours.

[jallerton]

Phil, on 2010-December-10, 10:18, said:

Split score anyone?

It seems West's failure to alert and the histrionics are UI to East. So 2♥ should not be allowed. Imagine an alert of 2♦ followed by a satisfied and confident pass by West conveying "I've got diamonds!" instead of the hemming and hawing + no alert.

However, NS don't get to keep their +500 in 2♦. They had a gross misunderstanding about the double of 2♥, so I think they get to keep their -470, no?

For North/South, described in the opening post as a "pick up partnership", it is not "wild or gambling" nor it it a "serious error" to have a misunderstanding about the meaning of a second round double. So splitting the score is just wrong.

But should the score be adjusted at all? Whilst I agree with Gerry that it is best to play pass as diamonds and rediuble as no preference, I would guess that very few club players have thought this through. The TD should perhaps poll some club players of East's standard, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the number of people who seriously consider passing is less than a "signifcant proportion" making Pass not a logical alternative for this particular player.

[FrancesHinden]

What does 2D mean if they are playing "Capelletti"?

[wyman]

FrancesHinden, on 2010-December-10, 13:47, said:

What does 2D mean if they are playing "Capelletti"?

majors.

[mycroft]

2D Cappelletti/Hamilton/(numerous others) is majors.

West humming and hawing about what East has and finally passing means "I can't remember what we play, but partner has another call, and he's better than me."

South's takeout of diamonds and North's passing it, by the best players in the room (from the point of view of these people) is pretty good idea that 2D is going down. I'm quite certain (but I'd ask) that they don't have an agreement about doubles of 2C and 2D (people learn conventions here without knowing what happens when the opponents don't blithely pass). I bet they don't *have* a "no preference" call, never mind which of pass and redouble it is.

East needs a discussion about UI, but South needs a discussion about when questions are appropriate, and that convention cards have a use. Remember North has UI, too, that this is takeout of diamonds (double and then check what it means, and make it clear to partner through the card-passing), and not minors (takeout of majors) or diamonds (whatever is their agreement).

If West had bid 2H, I'd probably be generous. I'd love to give -470/-500, but I'm not sure I can.

[bluejak]

In my corner of England and Wales, including good players down to poor players, I know of only one person who plays pass as to play and redouble as pick in analogous situations to this: me [and my partner]. I have to train my partners carefully to do this.

So, if I am neither East nor West, pass by East is not an LA.