another pick up bids instead of pass
#1
Posted 2013-February-16, 15:49
2 ♣-(pass)-2 ♠ -(pass)
3NT-(pass)-pass-(double)
At this point, dealer/opener picks up his bidding cards instead of passing.
Second position player who was thinking about what to lead to 3NT looking at his cards instead of looking at the rest of the auction, assumes the obvious: that opener picks up the cards because the bidding is over. So he picks his bidding-cards as well while still thinking about the lead, responder and doubler also pick up.
Finally the lead is a diamond letting 3NT doubled make when a heart lead would have defeated it. The guy on lead notices nothing untill the hand is scored when they say that the contract was doubled to his surprise. He claims that he never made a pass, so the bdding should not be over.
#2
Posted 2013-February-16, 17:28
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#3
Posted 2013-February-16, 17:35
Fluffy, on 2013-February-16, 15:49, said:
2 ♣-(pass)-2 ♠ -(pass)
3NT-(pass)-pass-(double)
At this point, dealer/opener picks up his bidding cards instead of passing. Second position player who was thinking about what to lead to 3NT looking at his cards instead of looking at the rest of the auction, assumes the obvious: that opener picks up the cards because the bidding is over. So he picks his bidding-cards as well while still thinking about the lead, responder and doubler also pick up.
Finally the lead is a diamond letting 3NT doubled make when a heart lead would have defeated it. The guy on lead notices nothing untill the hand is scored when they say that the contract was doubled to his surprise. He claims that he never made a pass, so the bdding should not be over.
This post has been edited by nige1: 2013-February-16, 17:39
#4
Posted 2013-February-16, 18:09
The next issue is who failed to follow correct procedure. The declaring side, who saw the double, clearly did and could have been aware that this infraction would affect the defending side. However, there is no reason to suspect that the opening leader meant his action as a pass. I do think the defending side should have been able to notice the double though - if the bidding cards had been taken off the box quickly the doubler would have been within his rights to make some comment that the auction was not yet done.
Given the information provided I would adjust the score under Law 23, to 3NTx making for the defenders and 3NTx going off on a heart lead for the declaring side.
#5
Posted 2013-February-17, 03:55
sfi, on 2013-February-16, 18:09, said:
The next issue is who failed to follow correct procedure. The declaring side, who saw the double, clearly did and could have been aware that this infraction would affect the defending side. However, there is no reason to suspect that the opening leader meant his action as a pass. I do think the defending side should have been able to notice the double though - if the bidding cards had been taken off the box quickly the doubler would have been within his rights to make some comment that the auction was not yet done.
Given the information provided I would adjust the score under Law 23, to 3NTx making for the defenders and 3NTx going off on a heart lead for the declaring side.
No question needs answering.
As correctly stated by both blackshoe and nige1 the auction has been completed although in an irregular way, and the play has been started (and even completed).
There is no reason for TD to make any adjustments, but there may be cause for PP because the players created problems by failing to follow correct procedure.
That a player claims to not having noticed the double is no excuse, the auction stands as made (assuming all pass when the bid cards were picked up).
#6
Posted 2013-February-17, 04:43
I could make some ruling that playing to the first trick accepts that the auction has finished and award the apparent table result or I could rule that no result is possible and award 40/40. If I was feeling particularly grumpy, I could award both sides the worse of 40% and their apparent table score.
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#7
Posted 2013-February-17, 04:44
just clarifying: opener/dealer was totally aware of the double, he just decided to pick his cards away because he suposed no other bid than pass is possible for the other players.
#8
Posted 2013-February-17, 05:21
Fluffy, on 2013-February-17, 04:44, said:
It is not illegal but it may lead to incorrect procedure, and the player who mistakes the auction is responsible for his own mistaking. If opener had thought the auction was over, there were two other players who did not make proper passes.
Fluffy, on 2013-February-17, 04:44, said:
In that case we can rule that everyone made passes but not in the correct manner.
If dealer was aware of the double but (OP) "he claims that he never made a pass, so the bdding should not be over" then he is guilty of deliberately breaking the laws to try and gain an advantage - and I would throw the book at him.
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#9
Posted 2013-February-17, 05:30
Quote
Granted, it concerns playing with screens, but anyway I don't see the action as an infraction per se.
However, here opener picks his cards before his partner has opportunity to bid and it is quite conceivable that he would like to remove doubled contract. It can be construed as an attempt to convey UI ("I have all bases covered"), so PP is definitely in order, in my opinion.
As for result, I think result stands - one should really pay attention and if bidding cards was removed too fast, the parnter could well linger a bit.
#10
Posted 2013-February-17, 05:37
pran, on 2013-February-17, 03:55, said:
This is exactly what I do not assume. The person picked up their cards because they thought the auction was already over. This action is not the same as picking it up as an incorrect method of passing.
#11
Posted 2013-February-17, 05:39
blackshoe, on 2013-February-16, 17:28, said:
The auction hasn't ended yet. There haven't been three successive passes, so West's lead and all that followed occurred during the auction. You can't accept a lead that is made during the auction.
What we have here is an incomplete auction and 52 exposed cards.
Quote
West is partly responsible for not noticing the double, but if South and North had followed proper procedure, that would have made West aware of the double.
Quote
We haven't seen any evidence that West intentionally did something wrong - all he did was fail to pay sufficient attention.
I agree that NS should be penalised for their wilful failure to follow proper procedure, and perhaps also for allowing the "play" to proceed even though the auction wasn't over (edit: though this was unintentional). East is also guilty of the latter offence.
This post has been edited by gnasher: 2013-February-17, 06:33
#13
Posted 2013-February-17, 06:17
Fluffy, on 2013-February-17, 04:44, said:
just clarifying: opener/dealer was totally aware of the double, he just decided to pick his cards away because he suposed no other bid than pass is possible for the other players.
Depends on how charitable you are, it could be sending the message "don't even think about pulling this partner".
#14
Posted 2013-February-17, 06:22
gombo121, on 2013-February-17, 06:06, said:
Of course you have a way to distinguish: you ask him why he picked up his cards, and he tells you.
#15
Posted 2013-February-17, 06:57
gnasher, on 2013-February-17, 06:22, said:
Sorry, not very practical after the end of the play.
I would gladly reopen bidding before the lead or may be even after the lead but before dummy have been shown, but certainly not when the result became clear.
#17
Posted 2013-February-17, 09:26
gombo121, on 2013-February-17, 06:57, said:
Why is it impractical? The director asks "Why did you pick up your cards?" and the player answers either "I thought the auction was over" or "I was trying to pass".
Quote
How you rule is a separate matter from determining what happened.
My point was that it's easy for the TD to distinguish between West picking up his cards as shorthand for "pass", and West picking up his cards because he thought the auction had already ended.
#18
Posted 2013-February-17, 09:35
What, a raised hand??? Do you have much experience in directing?
#19
Posted 2013-February-17, 11:53
pran, on 2013-February-17, 09:35, said:
What, a raised hand??? Do you have much experience in directing?
That situation is completely different from the one in the original post. In the situation you describe, all three of the other players intended their removal of the cards to mean "pass". In the situation in the original post, West intended his removal of the bidding cards merely as compliance with the regulations about what happens after the end of the auction.
Since you ask, though: no I've never experienced this situation. As the 4♥ bidder I would never do it. As one of the other three players I would point out that the auction wasn't over.
I don't direct, but I don't see why you imply that a director should expect to encounter this situation. If everybody is happy, nobody will call the director, so the director will never become aware of this minor breach of procedure.
#20
Posted 2013-February-17, 11:58
blackshoe, on 2013-February-16, 17:28, said:
I understand that the worst part of most players games is the use of the pass card and support the notion of double pp's with loud "Duh's" to both sides.
It has happened a few times to me where I let the opps pick up there cards and sit there waiting for my lead when I produced a bid instead.
What is baby oil made of?