[mrdct]

Scoring: MP

---

Playing natural methods, the uninterupted auctions proceeds:

1♠ : 2♣
3♠ : 3NT
4♠ : 5♥*
5♠ : pass

*After an agreed pause for thought, east exclaims "oh dear - I thought you bid 4NT".

11 tricks made.

EW are quite inexperienced. Stayman and Blackwood represent the full extent of sophistication in their methods and they most definately have never heard of cue bidding.

So I guess the question is, does the UI that east thought he was responding to blackwood suggest that west bid 5♠ in favour other logical alternatives?

[Codo]

1. Ethically: Unexperienced players should get some leeway.

2. Legally: The UI gives the impression that 1 KC is missing. The queen of trump is on board too, so you better bid the slam with the UI.

If they do not know about cuebidding, 5 ♥ does not deny a diamond cuebid as they do not know cuebids. So 5 ♥ without the UI had been kind of natural I guess and 5 ♠ is the only possible bid this West can make.

[pran]

East's remark is clearly UI to West; West may not select any alternative call that may have been suggested over other alternative calls by the knowledge that East holds two Aces.

What information is authorized to West?
1: The information that East has denied more than 4 hearts (or he should have bid 2♥ rather than 2♣ in the first round).
2: The information that East should know West does not have 4 cards in any suit other than spades (or West would have made a jump shift in his side suit rather than bidding 3♠).

The UI to West that East showed 2 Aces suggests that spade is established as trumps, but does West really have any logical alternative call to 5♠ from the information that is authorized for him?

I don't think so. (If anything it must be a preference to 6♣ rather than PASS or 6♥, but I really do not consider either as real logical alternatives.)

[campboy]

It's not just the knowledge that East has two aces which is unauthorised, but also the fact that he might have passed (or done something else) had he known what was going on.

However, I don't imagine there is an LA to 5♠ for this player.

[iviehoff]

Codo, on Sep 9 2010, 01:36 PM, said:

If they do not know about cuebidding, 5 ♥ does not deny a diamond cuebid as they do not know cuebids. So 5 ♥ without the UI had been kind of natural I guess and 5 ♠ is the only possible bid this West can make.

There are other things non-cuebidding players can do when their partner suddenly comes out with a new suit after agreeing another on. Playing with quite a good player, whose bidding philosophy was KISS (keep it simple, stupid) I experienced the auction (opponents silent) 1S-3S;4C-pass. My partner's explanation was that if I bid 4C in that situation, I must be exceedingly keen to play in clubs all of a sudden.

[blackshoe]

mrdct, on Sep 9 2010, 08:22 AM, said:

So I guess the question is, does the UI that east thought he was responding to blackwood suggest that west bid 5♠ in favour other logical alternatives?

No.

[Phil]

Codo, on Sep 9 2010, 07:36 AM, said:

Legally: The UI gives the impression that 1 KC is missing. The queen of trump is on board too, so you better bid the slam with the UI.

Are you suggesting that West should take advantage of the UI and bid slam?

If these players are as inexperienced as Dave claims, they don't know what 5♥ means. Poor souls, they might even go down in 5♠ misplaying the diamond suit, although I see they did not.

[aguahombre]

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 10:33 AM, said:

Codo, on Sep 9 2010, 07:36 AM, said:

Legally: The UI gives the impression that 1 KC is missing. The queen of trump is on board too, so you better bid the slam with the UI.

Are you suggesting that West should take advantage of the UI and bid slam?

If these players are as inexperienced as Dave claims, they don't know what 5♥ means. Poor souls, they might even go down in 5♠ misplaying the diamond suit, although I see they did not.

I thought the word "not" was accidentally omitted, and Codo was saying the UI suggested 6, so we had better only bid 5.

[Pict]

I thought I understood Codo's post as posted, and as a statement of what the not 'ethical' player would do.

Codo can correct aqua or me, if he chooses to bother either way.

[peachy]

mrdct, on Sep 9 2010, 07:22 AM, said:

So I guess the question is, does the UI that east thought he was responding to blackwood suggest that west bid 5♠ in favour other logical alternatives?

The UI [knowledge that partner has two aces] suggests bidding slam. This player probably was not even aware of the fact that he/she is not supposed to use UI and he bid 5S because was afraid six would not make. Doesn't matter, there is no LA to 5S.

[Codo]

aguahombre, on Sep 10 2010, 04:09 AM, said:

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 10:33 AM, said:

Codo, on Sep 9 2010, 07:36 AM, said:

Legally: The UI gives the impression that 1 KC is missing. The queen of trump is on board too, so you better bid the slam with the UI.

Are you suggesting that West should take advantage of the UI and bid slam?

If these players are as inexperienced as Dave claims, they don't know what 5♥ means. Poor souls, they might even go down in 5♠ misplaying the diamond suit, although I see they did not.

I thought the word "not" was accidentally omitted, and Codo was saying the UI suggested 6, so we had better only bid 5.

TY

[JoAnneM]

One way to get rid of a new pair in your club? Call the director in a situation like this. I can just about guarantee they won't be back.

[peachy]

JoAnneM, on Sep 9 2010, 05:44 PM, said:

One way to get rid of a new pair in your club? Call the director in a situation like this. I can just about guarantee they won't be back.

And not calling the TD is a sure way they will never learn the rules of the game. TD call need not be a stressful or embarrassing event in the game, it can be fun, friendly opportunity to brush up on rules of the game. And a good TD will make it such. And a newcomer with a normal ego will be happy of the opportunity to learn them.

[jdonn]

JoAnneM, on Sep 9 2010, 05:44 PM, said:

One way to get rid of a new pair in your club? Call the director in a situation like this. I can just about guarantee they won't be back.

If a pair would leave forever from that happening, then it would only have been a matter of time until that pair found another equally stupid reason to leave forever.

[aguahombre]

jdonn, on Sep 9 2010, 05:18 PM, said:

JoAnneM, on Sep 9 2010, 05:44 PM, said:

One way to get rid of a new pair in your club? Call the director in a situation like this.  I can just about guarantee they won't be back.

If a pair would leave forever from that happening, then it would only have been a matter of time until that pair found another equally stupid reason to leave forever.

True. Plus, since 5S would undoubtedly stand, their first experience with a director call would result in no loss to them; and if handled in an instructive way might prevent future problems.

(Whether it was his actual intention or not) TD could compliment West on not taking advantage of the UI and bidding six; and Td could also politely explain to East that conversation during the auction is not a good thing.

[mrdct]

Fortunately this club has a pretty good culture of calling the director in a non-confrontational manner for pretty much all irregularities, of which there is an astoundingly high rate of insufficient bids and leads out of turn as it happens.

The bloke who made the remark was most apologetic to his opponents and was, in fact, the person who called the director.

[Rossoneri]

mrdct, on Sep 10 2010, 01:04 AM, said:

Fortunately this club has a pretty good culture of calling the director in a non-confrontational manner for pretty much all irregularities, of which there is an astoundingly high rate of insufficient bids and leads out of turn as it happens.

The bloke who made the remark was most apologetic to his opponents and was, in fact, the person who called the director.

Good to hear!

I do agree as well that 5♠ should stand.

[bluejak]

JoAnneM, on Sep 9 2010, 11:44 PM, said:

One way to get rid of a new pair in your club? Call the director in a situation like this.  I can just about guarantee they won't be back.

I do not agree with this. Players do not object to a TD call: it is how he is called, what is said, and what he does that makes all the difference.