BBO Discussion Forums: It's 100% obvious! - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 6 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

It's 100% obvious!

#1 User is offline   jeremy69 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 412
  • Joined: 2009-June-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2010-June-02, 05:25

Scoring: MP



West North East South
No No   1S   x  
2H(A)  3C   3S  No 
No  4H All pass

North bids 3C without asking about the alert
South asks about the alert of 2H at her next turn and is told that it shows a sound raise to 2S, typically 7-9 with a 3 card raise.
North now bids 4H. This makes 10 tricks (It's either 10 or 11 depending on how you defend). 3S would make 9 tricks.
All players at the table are of a good standard.
EW call the director. The director rules that North is in receipt of UI but the question does not indicate anything about either values or hearts. He confides to EW that the people he consulted were not unanimous about this. EW appeal.
How do you rule in appeal?
0

#2 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,485
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2010-June-02, 05:41

It's hard to see how the question could do other than indicate an interest in hearts. I wonder what answer to the question could have been given that would have led South to bid rather than passing.

I also find it hard to see how North now thinks he's worth bidding game in hearts when, before his partner's question and pass, he was content to play in a part-score in clubs. Maybe he'll produce an argument that 3C showed values and he was "always going to bid 4H on the next round", but I'll need some convincing.
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#3 User is offline   mink 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 667
  • Joined: 2003-February-19
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 2010-June-02, 06:12

I can imagine that North made his bid disregarding South's question and would have made it without the question, too. However, the question did both indicate and strength, and pass is a LA for sure. Contract has to be changed to 3S.

Karl
0

#4 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-June-02, 06:34

I am not a big law guru (not even a small guru) but often I see players ask about opps' calls for the benefit of their partner, this often happens in a partnership where the stronger player is aware of opps' system. Is such a practice legal?
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#5 User is offline   PeterE 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 2006-March-16
  • Location:Warendorf, Germany

Posted 2010-June-02, 07:29

Law 20 G1 said:

It is improper to ask a question solely for partner’s benefit.


btw: count me for 3 ... and let's think about a PP re blantant use of UI.
0

#6 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-June-02, 07:32

oh :) well then doesn't this law apply here? I guess it's next to impossible to prove that, what would you do as Director if South told you "me? for partner's benefit? I wouldn't lift even 1 finger for that idiot, lol" ?
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#7 User is offline   campboy 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,347
  • Joined: 2009-July-21

Posted 2010-June-02, 07:42

PeterE, on Jun 2 2010, 02:29 PM, said:

btw: count me for 3 ... and let's think about a PP re blantant use of UI.

QFT
0

#8 User is offline   pooltuna 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,814
  • Joined: 2009-July-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Orleans

Posted 2010-June-02, 08:11

jeremy69, on Jun 2 2010, 06:25 AM, said:

Scoring: MP


West North East South
No No 1S x
2H(A) 3C 3S No
No 4H All pass

North bids 3C without asking about the alert
South asks about the alert of 2H at her next turn and is told that it shows a sound raise to 2S, typically 7-9 with a 3 card raise.
North now bids 4H. This makes 10 tricks (It's either 10 or 11 depending on how you defend). 3S would make 9 tricks.
All players at the table are of a good standard.
EW call the director. The director rules that North is in receipt of UI but the question does not indicate anything about either values or hearts. He confides to EW that the people he consulted were not unanimous about this. EW appeal.
How do you rule in appeal?

Lucky result, 4 stands.
"Tell me of your home world, Usul"
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

George Bernard Shaw
0

#9 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2010-June-02, 09:38

gwnn, on Jun 2 2010, 01:34 PM, said:

I am not a big law guru (not even a small guru) but often I see players ask about opps' calls for the benefit of their partner, this often happens in a partnership where the stronger player is aware of opps' system. Is such a practice legal?

NO!
Law 20G1: It is improper to ask a question solely for partner’s benefit.

PS.: Only now did I notice that PeterE had already answered the question.
0

#10 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2010-June-02, 10:30

gordontd, on Jun 2 2010, 05:41 AM, said:

It's hard to see how the question could do other than indicate an interest in hearts. I wonder what answer to the question could have been given that would have led South to bid rather than passing.

I also find it hard to see how North now thinks he's worth bidding game in hearts when, before his partner's question and pass, he was content to play in a part-score in clubs. Maybe he'll produce an argument that 3C showed values and he was "always going to bid 4H on the next round", but I'll need some convincing.

If on the AC, this would be exactly my contribution. If I were the director, I would state it as Mink did, below Gordon's quote.

Naw, I wouldn't be that diplomatic in either situation.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#11 User is offline   peachy 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,056
  • Joined: 2007-November-19
  • Location:Pacific Time

Posted 2010-June-02, 14:09

This may be a little OT, but the curious aspect of this situation is the following. In some places, asking about the alerted 2H bid could be interpreted as "interest in hearts", whether the question was made at the time the bid was made or at the next round. If he asked at the time, wouldn't he be between a rock and a hard place - If he at his first opportunity asked and bid clubs, it would show interest in hearts as well as clubs, and if he asked and passed, it would show interest in hearts? All in all, I think it is best to ask at the time the bid is made, but I am willing to give the 3C bidder the benefit of the doubt. The rules in EBU say (unless I am wrong and I well could be) that you don't ask unless it affects the choice of call you were making at that time.
0

#12 User is offline   dburn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,154
  • Joined: 2005-July-19

Posted 2010-June-02, 15:55

peachy, on Jun 2 2010, 03:09 PM, said:

This may be a little OT, but the curious aspect of this situation is the following. In some places, asking about the alerted 2H bid could be interpreted as "interest in hearts", whether the question was made at the time the bid was made or at the next round. If he asked at the time, wouldn't he be between a rock and a hard place - If he at his first opportunity asked and bid clubs, it would show interest in hearts as well as clubs, and if he asked and passed, it would show interest in hearts? All in all, I think it is best to ask at the time the bid is made, but I am willing to give the 3C bidder the benefit of the doubt. The rules in EBU say (unless I am wrong and I well could be) that you don't ask unless it affects the choice of call you were making at that time.

The 3 bidder wasn't the one who asked about 2. His partner asked about it at her earliest legal opportunity - that is, when the auction had come back to her with 3 on her right.
When Senators have had their sport
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.
0

#13 User is offline   karlson 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 2005-April-06

Posted 2010-June-02, 16:06

I think it's crazy if doubler can't ask without it suggesting something about hearts. It's a live auction where all 4 hands are bidding, I think everyone should always ask about alerted calls. What if 2 showed clubs and 3 would be a cuebid by our agreements (and partner knew the opponents' system from looking at the card or something). What if I can infer the opponents are having an accident from the explanation and from my hand, that would be useful information to have.

Now if the argument is that the 3 bidder didn't ask last time, so he probably wasn't going to ask this time, so the question was the only thing that would wake him up and he'd never think to bid 4 otherwise, then I don't know what the ruling should be, and I'm glad we have people that probably do know. But to me the argument that the doubler's question transmits UI about heart strength is ludicrous.
0

#14 User is offline   jdeegan 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,427
  • Joined: 2005-August-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Economics
    Finance
    Bridge bidding theory
    Cooking
    Downhill skiing

Posted 2010-June-02, 16:30

:) Bizarre bidding, not the least by South who made a TO double with 6 HCP, but he did have the 's he promised. I don't see where the "director" found any UI. South has a right to find out what LHO's alerted 2 bid meant. Odd for a passed hand, North, to bid 4 after passing initially, but he could have the hand for it - 4-6, 4-5 or 5-6 in and plus a few working high cards, but not enough to open the bidding second seat.

It's hard to say not seeing North's hand, but imo E-W are probably the lowest of the low, lawyering to try to get a good score rather than playing bridge. It's just a game, folks.
0

#15 User is offline   jeremy69 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 412
  • Joined: 2009-June-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2010-June-02, 16:40

Quote

Bizarre bidding, not the least by South who made a TO double with 6 HCP

I think you have misread the auction. North had the 6 count and South a. made the take out double and b. asked the question. The hand given bid 3C followed by 4H.
0

#16 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-June-02, 18:20

The entire alert system creates no-win situations for the other side in places like this. If either player asks then his partner is forever constrained from bidding hearts. If no one asks then no one knows what's going on. If you ask about every alerted bid every time the director would still have to believe it, you'd be slowing the game down, and in that case why have alerts anyway instead of just announcing the meaning of all alertable bids?

The only solution I can think of other than screens (which are far from perfect) is to play on a computer. I still think we are headed there down the road at high levels, with this being one of many reasons.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#17 User is offline   bluejak 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,686
  • Joined: 2007-August-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, Cats, Railways, Transport timetables

  Posted 2010-June-02, 18:57

You have a game which works in most situations, with a few problems. Why spoil the game for millions because of those very few problems? I do not see why we must have computer use instead of live bridge because there are occasional difficulties. No doubt there will be other problems with computers.

As to the hand, there seems to me in several answers no clear division between whether the UI suggests strength, or hearts, or strength in hearts, or strength and hearts. I think this failure to distinguish leads to muddled thinking about the hand.

The pro question, which has been illegal for some time and now is clarified in the Laws, is not relevant in the particular partnership.

The facts as stated by Jeremy are not completely in accord with what happened at the time. I am not quite sure whether he has changed them deliberately because he thinks it aids the problem, or whether he is mistaken.
David Stevenson

Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
0

#18 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2010-June-02, 18:59

jdonn, on Jun 3 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

The only solution I can think of other than screens (which are far from perfect) is to play on a computer. I still think we are headed there down the road at high levels, with this being one of many reasons.

But would there, in that case, be any players at high levels?
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#19 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-June-02, 19:52

bluejak, on Jun 2 2010, 07:57 PM, said:

You have a game which works in most situations, with a few problems.  Why spoil the game for millions because of those very few problems?  I do not see why we must have computer use instead of live bridge because there are occasional difficulties.  No doubt there will be other problems with computers.

As always you have taken to grossly exagerate any claim you disagree with. Do millions play at high levels?
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#20 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-June-02, 19:54

Vampyr, on Jun 2 2010, 07:59 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 3 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

The only solution I can think of other than screens (which are far from perfect) is to play on a computer. I still think we are headed there down the road at high levels, with this being one of many reasons.

But would there, in that case, be any players at high levels?

Oh no, something different that we aren't used to, no one can ever adapt to change!

I mean who would ever want to play in a game that is MUCH faster, has almost no UI problems, no revokes, no bids out of turn, no leads out of turn, no quitted tricks turned the wrong way, explanations recorded to see at any time, clear records of the tempo taken before all actions, doesn't force dummy to sit at the table, and has a bunch of other advantages? Insanity!

I mean your comment is so lol. Have you noticed how many people enjoy playing bridge on a computer these days, which was unheard of not long ago?
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

  • 6 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users