[mycroft]

No comment on the case (except that I think that if this is 12C1e, it had better be for "world-class experts and up"), but as a data point, some people are pulling out 12C1e for failure to ask about two unAlerted calls (and possibly a very very poor explanation (Q = "queen"? Q = "cue"?)) on this hand from D25 Open GNT. And getting some agreement (and a *lot* of pushback, to be clear).

[pescetom]

mycroft, on 2024-April-12, 10:35, said:

No comment on the case (except that I think that if this is 12C1e, it had better be for "world-class experts and up"), but as a data point, some people are pulling out 12C1e for failure to ask about two unAlerted calls (and possibly a very very poor explanation (Q = "queen"? Q = "cue"?)) on this hand from D25 Open GNT. And getting some agreement (and a *lot* of pushback, to be clear).

Missed this one, thanks. I'm blissfully ignorant of what pushback might be, but I agree 100% with DB (as almost always) about the scandalous and repeated failure to explain online and with OP about the significance of East's double of 4♠ and the probable outcome with correct explanations by EW.

[mycroft]

Yeah, I'm shocked this happened, especially online. Must be another case of "of course this is the correct meaning for this call, what's the confusion" with the added "shortcut Q=cue, when holding the Queen, might be misread?" one of those things that disappears in the concentration of the district open finals.

My line is probably 100% expected: "yeah, 99.9% of the time, you get away with 'almost' correct, because everyone can fill in what you missed that 'everybody knows'. The one time in 1000 that's not the case, though? You did something wrong, it caused damage, the result of the ruling is yours to own, not mine."