[chasetb]

Let's say you are playing a method (whether Spiral Scan or DCB or something similar), and you have a mess-up in that you denied a specific card you have. Earlier today, I had shown 8-11 HCP, 4243 shape, the A♦, but denied the K♠ (I thought I had denied the K♦ when I bid, but realized my mess up a few seconds later, right before partner explained it to opps). My only top honors were A♦, K♠, Q♥ How would you recover, not being able to show/fabricate any Jacks?

I'll post the hand here in 2-3 days. Thanks to everyone who votes or posts, and doubly for anyone who votes, and posts their reasoning why!

[Fluffy]

you should try to hit a card partner has so he understands there has been a missunderstanding at some point. This will make partner foret about what honors you've got and focus on the part he can rely: 4243 8-11.

Showing a lot of cards in one shot without committing too much sounds like the best you can do. ending up in 5 something hopefully.

[Vampyr]

The problem is that you have UI, so you can't do anything except proceed under the same misapprehension you had when you thought you were denying ♦K rather than ♠K. I should have thought this was obvious, and am surprised that another poster also didn't understand your ethical obligations.

[Free]

With screens it would be quite easy imo: you messed up so don't mess it up more and just don't lie about another King or ♠Q.

Without screens it doesn't matter if you realized before or after partner explained, you have UI and should continue bidding like you don't know you messed up. This may result in showing another top honor or not, that really depends if you just forgot a step or if you mixed up the order of the suits.

Anecdote: My worst experience in this regard was when playing with screens and partner asked my entire hand. I show my 4=4=1=4 (I held ♠AKQ and a side suit Q) and suddenly I realized that RHO had doubled one of my partner's relays 2 rounds ago! I didn't have UI, but I could calculate what I had shown: a 1=4=5=3! Try to show ♠AKQ when holding a singleton... Partner asked about QP's, I showed 7 (because I knew I could make it clear to partner that I made an error this way: showing 6 might suggest I hold 2 Aces), he started the DCB scan and I showed only my Q. He thought like 10 minutes because it didn't add up. It was impossible for me to hold only ♠A and one other top honor and 7 QP's. He settled for 5♦ in a 5-1 fit and I went 1 down.
I still wonder if it's sometimes possible for someone to figure out where it all went wrong, especially when your partner 'never' messes up. Like in my case, my partner was the one to miss a step somewhere from time to time, so he thought he made the mistake but couldn't figure out where exactly. He didn't even think that I made an error, but even if he'd realize that I'm not flawless either, where did it happen? And how soon was I able to try to recover? A relatively obvious moment to make a mistake is after the Dbl, but then what?

[gwnn]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-01, 23:22, said:

The problem is that you have UI, so you can't do anything except proceed under the same misapprehension you had when you thought you were denying ♦K rather than ♠K. I should have thought this was obvious, and am surprised that another poster also didn't understand your ethical obligations.

It's unlikely OP was 'woken up' by any alert since this is probably above 3NT already and opps know better than to ask about each call.

[Vampyr]

gwnn, on 2013-September-02, 00:09, said:

It's unlikely OP was 'woken up' by any alert since this is probably above 3NT already and opps know better than to ask about each call.

Well, whatever. A explanation was given. That is all I know.

[gwnn]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-02, 00:20, said:

Well, whatever. A explanation was given. That is all I know.

Ah. Reading problems again, sorry. I agree with you 100% then.

[Trinidad]

I think you should add another option: "Do what I am ethically obligated to do: Make the call that I would make thinking that I denied the ♦K."

Probably this is the call that you thought will show the ♠K. It would not surprise me if that would be the call that -according to your correct agreements- shows the ♦K.

Rik

[Fluffy]

Free, on 2013-September-02, 00:09, said:

Without screens it doesn't matter if you realized before or after partner explained, you have UI and should continue bidding like you don't know you messed up. This may result in showing another top honor or not, that really depends if you just forgot a step or if you mixed up the order of the suits.

Why doesn't it matter? he realized before UI was given, so the UI didn't change anything.

[dake50]

I have UI: I have SK but my bid denied SK.
I am obligated to bid as if I didn't HAVE that SK.

[Trinidad]

Fluffy, on 2013-September-02, 03:59, said:

Why doesn't it matter? he realized before UI was given, so the UI didn't change anything.

Yes, the UI does change something. There are two ways to look at this:

1) pragmatic
There is no TD in the world who is going to believe that you realized you misbid, just before the UI told you that you misbid. So while it may be the truth, be realistic and don't go there. That means act as if the UI woke you up, with all the consequences.

2) legalistic
The fact that you figured out that you misbid before the UI, doesnot make the UI that you misbid go away. That UI is still there and it may still limit your options.

Rik

[Vampyr]

Trinidad, on 2013-September-02, 06:25, said:

There is no TD in the world who is going to believe that you realized you misbid, just before the UI told you that you misbid. So while it may be the truth, be realistic and don't go there. That means act as if the UI woke you up, with all the consequences.

I don't know if it's so much the case that the TD won't believe you. It's just that this has no bearing on the ruling.

[gnasher]

If you knew before you heard partner's explanation that you'd misbid, it is not logical to continue to bid as though in ignorance of the misbid. So it is certainly legal to try to get out of the mess using the knowledge that you've misbid.

As a matter of TD practice, the director will simply disregard any unsupported claim that you'd remembered the agremeent before receiving the UI. This is necessary to avoid the TD having to decide whether to believe you or not.

[Vampyr]

Duplicate.

[Vampyr]

gnasher, on 2013-September-02, 08:25, said:

If you knew before you heard partner's explanation that you'd misbid, it is not logical to continue to bid as though in ignorance of the misbid. So it is certainly legal to try to get out of the mess using the knowledge that you've misbid.

I don't think this is right, Andy; in fact I think that you have contradicted yourself. Anyway if this thread gets moved into the correct forum (mods?) we can hear from the likes of Gordon and Robin.

[gnasher]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-02, 09:02, said:

I don't think this is right, Andy; in fact I think that you have contradicted yourself.

Then why don't you tell me where I've got it wrong, and tell me which of my statements contradict each other?

[lamford]

gnasher, on 2013-September-02, 08:25, said:

If you knew before you heard partner's explanation that you'd misbid, it is not logical to continue to bid as though in ignorance of the misbid. So it is certainly legal to try to get out of the mess using the knowledge that you've misbid.

To "try to get out of the mess" sounds like a breach of 73C. If you know that you have misbid, you just select from LAs one not demonstrably suggested by the UI. And 16B says "using the methods of the partnership", so that is what you use to decide on the LAs, not the methods you think or thought they are. We do have Law 75, which is entitled 'Mistaken Explanation or Mistaken Call', neither of which applies here, but would make you continue to use the mistaken methods in some situations, even when they are in direct opposition to Law 16B1(b). No doubt some say that 16B1(b) does not mean what it says in cases like this either.

'When I make a bid,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

And I agree this thread is in the wrong forum.

[lamford]

In addition, I think that if Law 73C produces a different answer to Law 16B, then you should select the LA that is likely to be least favourable to your side.

[FrancesHinden]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-02, 09:02, said:

I don't think this is right, Andy; in fact I think that you have contradicted yourself. Anyway if this thread gets moved into the correct forum (mods?) we can hear from the likes of Gordon and Robin.

I see no contradiction.
If you knew you had misbid before you received any UI, you technically have no legal obligations at all related to the UI, you can do anything you like to try and recover.
However, the fact that you are the only person who knows that the UI told you nothing, means that legally the TD will rule as if the UI was what "woke you up". So, in practice, you are constrained just as much by the UI as if it was what had woken you up.

Not a contradiction, just a bid of pedantry.

[Vampyr]

I see, Frances. Andy's post was too subtle for me.