[RunemPard]

The auction has gone..

(1♦)-2♦*-(4♣)**-P
(4♠***)-P-(6♠)-AP

*5/5M or rare 5/4 with a solid 4 card suit
**Gerber...
***2 Aces...

Partner, who has extremely bad hearing, alerts 2♦ as both majors, typically 5/5 but can be 5/4 if the 4 card suit is decent. The man hears her incorrectly, and inquires, both minors? (they can sound a little alike in Swedish) Partner does not hear this and passes. Nothing else is said and the bidding stops for play. I lead the ♣A and continue clubs into west's hand. At this point he sets his cards on the table and says I will take the rest. In this spot, thanks to BBO forum reading, called the director immediately and explained what has happened. A few others are called and eventually the best director in the club is called to explain that in this spot the claim is assumed as running your highs since no line has been stated. It seemed as if he did not know that I held the majors.

This is where the twist comes in...Do I need to clarify for my opponents what the bid was when my partner has not heard the 2nd inquiry? Does the fact that they did not hear my partner's description accurately affect anything? The spades suit was something like...

-----------------------PARD(S)
------------------------VOID
(E)dummy AKQJ75----86 (W)declarer
-----------------------T9432
------------------------ME(N)

[dustinst22]

RunemPard, on 2013-January-14, 15:44, said:

The auction has gone..

(1♦)-2♦*-(4♣)**-P
(4♠***)-P-(6♠)-AP

*5/5M or rare 5/4 with a solid 4 card suit
**Gerber...
***2 Aces...

Partner, who has extremely bad hearing, alerts 2♦ as both majors, typically 5/5 but can be 5/4 if the 4 card suit is decent. The man hears her incorrectly, and inquires, both minors? (they can sound a little alike in Swedish) Partner does not hear this and passes. Nothing else is said and the bidding stops for play. I lead the ♣A and continue clubs into west's hand. At this point he sets his cards on the table and says I will take the rest. In this spot, thanks to BBO forum reading, called the director immediately and explained what has happened. A few others are called and eventually the best director in the club is called to explain that in this spot the claim is assumed as running your highs since no line has been stated. It seemed as if he did not know that I held the majors.

This is where the twist comes in...Do I need to clarify for my opponents what the bid was when my partner has not heard the 2nd inquiry? Does the fact that they did not hear my partner's description accurately affect anything? The spades suit was something like...

-----------------------PARD(S)
------------------------VOID
(E)dummy AKQJ75----86 (W)declarer
-----------------------T9432
------------------------ME(N)

I think after the auction is over and before you lead, you should inform the person who inquired of your partner that she is hard of hearing and didn't hear the question. You should make sure the question he had is clarified before you make your lead.

It absolutely affects how the hand would be played here obviously.

Still a sloppy claim imo.

[Trinidad]

RunemPard, on 2013-January-14, 15:44, said:

Partner, who has extremely bad hearing, alerts 2♦ as both majors, typically 5/5 but can be 5/4 if the 4 card suit is decent. The man hears her incorrectly, and inquires, both minors? (they can sound a little alike in Swedish) Partner does not hear this and passes.

I don't understand this. It isn't partner's turn to call. Your LHO hasn't gotten an answer to his question ("both minors?") yet. Why would he call before he got an answer?

The central thing in this case is: Why doesn't everybody make sure that the communication at the table runs smoothly? I truely don't see why you couldn't ask your partner: "Did you hear his question?" when you see the confusion.

Rik

[bluejak]

Would it not be nice if players asked "What does 2♦ show?"?

[nige1]

bluejak, on 2013-January-27, 14:23, said:

Would it not be nice if players asked "What does 2♦ show?"?

In the OP, that question seems to have been asked and answered but heard incorrectly. Then, the rhetorical question "both minors?" wasn't heard either. Perhaps the director should consider the potential misinformation before judging the faulty claim. And rule that players switch on their hearing-aids or insist on written explanations