insufficient bid conventional ACBL
#1
Posted 2011-January-10, 21:41
My question is whether the rulings were correct?
A: bidding 2S-2NT-P-2D
Director allowed this to be corrected to 3D in that 3D had same meaning as 2D [both transfers to Hearts]
B: bidding 1D-4NT-P-4H
Director said that 5H would not have same meaning as 4H therefore partner will be bared after
4H bid is made sufficient by any bid. [Chose bid 6D]
Comments
#2
Posted 2011-January-10, 23:15
Quote
Quote
Quote
B: Yes.
Quote
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
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 2011-January-11, 02:50
#4
Posted 2011-January-11, 03:10
dickiegera, on 2011-January-10, 21:41, said:
My question is whether the rulings were correct?
A: bidding 2S-2NT-P-2D
Director allowed this to be corrected to 3D in that 3D had same meaning as 2D [both transfers to Hearts]
B: bidding 1D-4NT-P-4H
Director said that 5H would not have same meaning as 4H therefore partner will be bared after
4H bid is made sufficient by any bid. [Chose bid 6D]
Comments
First of all we need to know the meanings of the overcalls 2NT resp. 4NT?
To me the 2NT overcall looks like showing both minors in which case 2D is a natural preference for Diamonds like 3D would also be, and the correction to 3D is OK. If 2NT really shows a strong NT hand after which a transfer system is on I would also accept 2D to be corrected to 3D with both bids being transfers to hearts, but that agreement surprises me.
In the second case I have no understanding for 4NT being Blackwood (unless there is a typo: P missing between 1D and 4NT) so I cannot make any ruling here.
Blackshoe's summary of Law 27 is of course correct.
#5
Posted 2011-January-11, 03:32
pran, on 2011-January-11, 03:10, said:
Really? What do you do with a strong balanced hand when your RHO opens a weak two?
London UK
#6
Posted 2011-January-11, 08:15
4NT was blackwood
Bidding was 1D-P-4NT-P
4H
Sorry
#7
Posted 2011-January-11, 08:52
dickiegera, on 2011-January-11, 08:15, said:
4NT was blackwood
Bidding was 1D-P-4NT-P
4H
Sorry
In that case I would rule both OP corrections available without barring partner:
In a} as I noted it doesn't really matter whether 2D was natural (minor suit select) or transfer, because the replacement call will have the same or a more precise meaning in either case.
And in b} I would rule 4H a misbid that could have been corrected (to 5H) under Law 25A if it had been corrected in time for this; the apparent meaning of this bid appears to be 3 steps answer to a Blackwood bid. (What else?????)
#8
Posted 2011-January-11, 12:06
#9
Posted 2011-January-11, 17:05
mycroft, on 2011-January-11, 12:06, said:
In that case I believe a 5D response to 4NT should have the same or a more precise meaning as the 4H response to 4C and the Director is responsible for the offender to know this before selecting a call to replace the IB.
The Director should investigate what the offender believed (s)he did in order to make the correct ruling and help the offender avoid selecting an unfortunate alternative action.
#10
Posted 2011-January-11, 17:54
Hence, as pran said, it's important for the TD to establish which particular mistake the IBer made.
#11
Posted 2011-January-12, 01:15