[helene_t]

I think 4♥ is quite a stretch but it probably falls short of a sewog. I would ask W why he would have bid differently if he had known it was ghestem. As campboy says, they might play 3♦ as a good heart raise.

As for pronounciation, it should be guest-EM i.e. with stress on the second syllable.

BTW, I don't understand why everybody is assuming that they play ghestem as weak-or-strong. Ghestem himself might have played it that way but I would still call it "ghestem" if I played it as sound or as wide-ranging.

[Oof Arted]

VixTD, on 2011-June-14, 06:48, said:

---

Multiple teams-of-four, IMPs
3♣ was Ghestem, showing spades and diamonds, not alerted, explained before East's 3♥ bid as a weak jump overcall.

Result: 4♥(W)-2, NS+200

The TD was called at the end of play for a correction of the misexplanation. West said that had she known 3♣ was Ghestem she would have passed rather than bid 4♥.

What should the ruling be?

Unless I am misreading this the bid was explained as WJO in Clubs ; By Whom ??? I assume South if so; and indeed if it states the Dreaded Ghestem on their CC; then E/W have been Damaged.

However looking at the hands I would offer E/W what I think was called in circles a 'Higson' ; as 5♦ appears to be a make

[lamford]

helene_t, on 2011-June-15, 08:17, said:

I think 4♥ is quite a stretch but it probably falls short of a sewog. I would ask W why he would have bid differently if he had known it was ghestem. As campboy says,

Even thinking of classing 4♥ as a SEWoG is a serious error. After the WJO, partner is under pressure, and as little as Kxxx K10xx xxx xx gives good play for game. I would also ask West why he would have bid differently, but he will no doubt give me a withering look.

And as for Oof Arted's idea that North-South can reach 5D after South thinks North has a WJO, I would ask why it would go any differently to (Pass) X (Pass) 4C by South? North should be delighted to play there, opposite a putative x xxxx x Q9xxxxx.

And what was the ruling on this one?

[Oof Arted]

Assuming the poor TD should agree with West and cancel the 4♥ does not North now have the right to Re-Bid Legally ???

[lamford]

Oof Arted, on 2011-June-16, 03:49, said:

Assuming the poor TD should agree with West and cancel the 4♥ does not North now have the right to Re-Bid Legally ???

Yes, he does; indeed he will be deemed to select whatever the TD (or a poll) decides is the normal action for his hand (possibly with a weighting for each choice). Which is probably double to show a good hand. His partner, however, will be deemeed to continue to believe North has a weak jump overcall, albeit a somewhat stronger one, and he will presumably support clubs. One of the perils of forgetting Ghestem, sadly.

[Oof Arted]

lamford, on 2011-June-16, 06:32, said:

Yes, he does; indeed he will be deemed to select whatever the TD (or a poll) decides is the normal action for his hand (possibly with a weighting for each choice). Which is probably double to show a good hand. His partner, however, will be deemeed to continue to believe North has a weak jump overcall, albeit it a somewhat stronger one, and he will presumably support clubs. One of the perils of forgetting Ghestem, sadly.

But Me as North have done nothing wrong except use Ghestem Correctley as per partnership it is my Idiot partner who has forgotten

Can I be penalised and prevented from bidding ♦

[RMB1]

Oof Arted, on 2011-June-16, 08:14, said:

Can I be penalised and prevented from bidding ♦

Not penalized directly, no.

But prevented from bidding, yes: if you have unauthorised information from a failure to alert or misexplanation.

[Oof Arted]

RMB1, on 2011-June-16, 08:50, said:

Not penalized directly, no.

But prevented from bidding, yes: if you have unauthorised information from a failure to alert or misexplanation.

yes robin but in this scenario the TD is going to agree with West and cancel the 4♥ bid

Why cannot I bid ♦???

[phil_20686]

This whole auction is pretty bonkers. How can N/S play a preempt style where north is wide ranging enough to allow an action dble, if south does not have an auto raise to 4C?

E-W appear to be complaining when they have a huge board. I would expect a significant number of tables to be in 5D=. If west had not bid 4H north would have had to back in and now there is a real chance that opponents could get to 5D.

I would definitely want to know what the traveller looked like before I considered an adjustment.

Finally, it is not clear to me that knowing it was ghestem would not make even more tempting to bid 4H? If I knew it was ghestem but did not know that sough had misunderstood I would be forced to infer that the could not have a big fit in diamonds and spades, but since we have a heart fit they must have a club fit, and my hand still looks equally good.

Its really only the information that south has misunderstood that makes it tempting to pass 3!h, and that is as much because now west is barred from doing anything sensible, than for any "bridge reason" as given your good heart fit it is pretty likely that they have a good fit somewhere and you might want to step on that before they back in.

Also, if they do not play action doubles, then they may well have the common agreement that all dbles after a pre-empt are penalty, and south with 4!h, being barred from remembering that this is ghestem by directorial fiat (by far the most likely occurrence imo), will be forced to conclude that partner is making a penalty double, which he will sit for 3!hx-1 and the same result.

[Vampyr]

The problem with Ghestem is that pairs are permitted to keep it on their convention card even when both halves of a partnership have never remembered they were playing it on the same hand. Even if there were a mechanism for reporting it, most players would feel slightly churlish calling the director to do so in the middle of writing down the +800 that is the routime result of opponents' Ghestem.

But one time in maybe 10, the Ghestem players will manage to land on their feet (generally when there was a misbid and not a misexplanation). The opponents are never able to untangle the auction and get a bad result, and can get no recourse even though it is highly quetionable whether the opponents can be said to have been playing Ghestem.

[nige1]

Vixtd said...
Multiple teams-of-four, IMPs 3♣ was Ghestem, showing spades and diamonds, not alerted, explained before East's 3♥ bid as a weak jump overcall. Result: 4♥(W)-2, NS+200 The TD was called at the end of play for a correction of the misexplanation. West said that had she known 3♣ was Ghestem she would have passed rather than bid 4♥.

Oof Arted said "Assuming the poor TD should agree with West and cancel the 4♥ does not North now have the right to Re-Bid Legally ??? "

In the orginal and other possible auctions, is Pass by North a permitted LA? I agree with Paul and Oof Arted that North could double to show extras. In which case, is 5♣ or 4♣ the likely result (without UI)?

---

[bluejak]

phil_20686, on 2011-June-16, 09:32, said:

E-W appear to be complaining when they have a huge board. I would expect a significant number of tables to be in 5D=. If west had not bid 4H north would have had to back in and now there is a real chance that opponents could get to 5D.

If a pair gain from an infraction their opponents deserve redress even if they already have a good score.

phil_20686, on 2011-June-16, 09:32, said:

I would definitely want to know what the traveller looked like before I considered an adjustment.

Why? That's definitely not recommended as a way to go about ruling.

[campboy]

Oof Arted, on 2011-June-16, 09:04, said:

yes robin but in this scenario the TD is going to agree with West and cancel the 4♥ bid

Why cannot I bid ♦???

Because North has unauthorised information that partner has forgotten the system. He is not allowed to use this information to decide between bidding one of his suits and doubling. The information makes doubling less attractive (since partner might continue to misinterpret it), so if double is a logical alternative (which it obviously is) he isn't permitted to bid diamonds instead.

[shintaro]

campboy, on 2011-June-17, 06:40, said:

Because North has unauthorised information that partner has forgotten the system. He is not allowed to use this information to decide between bidding one of his suits and doubling. The information makes doubling less attractive (since partner might continue to misinterpret it), so if double is a logical alternative (which it obviously is) he isn't permitted to bid diamonds instead.

but bidding 4♥ to force is logical whereas systemically double is not

[blackshoe]

Which brings us into that nice surreal area where "logical alternative" doesn't mean what the words say, it means something more like "plausible alternative for the class of player involved". That's bridge for ya.

[VixTD]

I discussed the hand with a few players, who thought it was quite plausible that West would pass if told 3♣ was Ghestem. I asked NS what sort of playing strength they could have for Ghestem bids, and North said that although he played "weak or strong" in other partnerships, he wasn't sure he had a firm agreement in this one. I didn't think he would pass over 3♥, the players' favoured call was double, after which they thought that South would bid 4♣, and this would be passed out. I tried prompting them to bid 5♣, or for EW to double 4♣ (not obvious, in my view, but worth considering), but they all thought it unlikely. Therefore I adjusted the score to 4♣(N)-5.

I will doubtless be criticised (and quite right, too) for failing to give a weighted score: West might have bid 4♥ either immediately or over 4♣, someone might have doubled 4♣, or bid to 5♣ and been doubled, and made a different number of tricks. Another source of confusion would be North's double to South. You can all pontificate as much as you like about what it ought to mean, but I am pretty sure these players would have no idea (as I don't) what a double by a pre-emptor opposite a passed partner should mean.

[shintaro]

VixTD, on 2011-June-17, 07:41, said:

I discussed the hand with a few players, who thought it was quite plausible that West would pass if told 3♣ was Ghestem. I asked NS what sort of playing strength they could have for Ghestem bids, and North said that although he played "weak or strong" in other partnerships, he wasn't sure he had a firm agreement in this one. I didn't think he would pass over 3♥, the players' favoured call was double, after which they thought that South would bid 4♣, and this would be passed out. I tried prompting them to bid 5♣, or for EW to double 4♣ (not obvious, in my view, but worth considering), but they all thought it unlikely. Therefore I adjusted the score to 4♣(N)-5.

I will doubtless be criticised (and quite right, too) for failing to give a weighted score: West might have bid 4♥ either immediately or over 4♣, someone might have doubled 4♣, or bid to 5♣ and been doubled, and made a different number of tricks. Another source of confusion would be North's double to South. You can all pontificate as much as you like about what it ought to mean, but I am pretty sure these players would have no idea (as I don't) what a double by a pre-emptor opposite a passed partner should mean.

Hi J

Just curious did East make any noises as to them not bidding 3♥ had they known it was the dreaded Guess Tem :

[VixTD]

shintaro, on 2011-June-17, 09:53, said:

Hi J

Just curious did East make any noises as to them not bidding 3♥ had they known it was the dreaded Guess Tem :

They didn't. I would look sceptically at such claims in any case, as it looks fairly obvious to show the heart support, whether 3♣ is explained as weak with clubs or unknown strength with spades and diamonds.