[pescetom]

Given that things are rather quiet, how about this one.
Both sides playing 2/1 with strong NT.

MP

---

After West makes the contract, South calls you to complain about the very slow double (acknowledged by EW).
How do you evaluate the situation and how do you proceed?
Would you look at the full hand diagram with double-dummy analysis if you had it available, and would it effect your evaluation if South had done so before calling you?

[barmar]

You find peers of West to poll. First ask them what they would consider and do after the double without telling them that it was slow; this provides you with the logical alternatives. Then tell them that the double was slow, and ask which of these actions they think are more likely to be successful given what it suggests about doubler's hand; these actions violate Law 16.

You only look at the hand diagram to decide if NS were damaged. If they can't make 2♠ they were getting -200 or worse, so -140 is a gain and result stands. But if they could have made the contract, you need to determine if pulling the double was suggested by the break in tempo.

[smerriman]

barmar, on 2025-January-08, 17:12, said:

If they can't make 2♠ they were getting -200 or worse, so -140 is a gain and result stands. But if they could have made the contract, you need to determine if pulling the double was suggested by the break in tempo.

"Could" make 2♠, or "would" make 2♠? This is tough to determine in itself, and definitely not based on double dummy.

[blackshoe]

smerriman, on 2025-January-08, 17:57, said:

"Could" make 2♠, or "would" make 2♠? This is tough to determine in itself, and definitely not based on double dummy.

Law 12C1(b) said:

The Director in awarding an assigned adjusted score should seek to recover as nearly as possible the probable outcome of
the board had the infraction not occurred.

"Probable" implies "could", not "would".

[Cyberyeti]

blackshoe, on 2025-January-09, 11:34, said:

"Probable" implies "could", not "would".

Not sure that's true, if you have to play a 5% line not a 60% line to make it you don't get ALL of the score for making it.

[smerriman]

Other way around, probable means would (what was most likely to happen had there been no infraction), not what technically could have happened.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2025-January-08, 17:12, said:

You find peers of West to poll. First ask them what they would consider and do after the double without telling them that it was slow; this provides you with the logical alternatives. Then tell them that the double was slow, and ask which of these actions they think are more likely to be successful given what it suggests about doubler's hand; these actions violate Law 16.

We may well go there (and perhaps more), but for me you are jumping the gun: I would first ask about 1NT and Double. If 1NT denies support and they can prove that Double is takeout, then I would just remind East about tempo and leave the table.

And if they cannot prove that Double is takeout, still not sure I really need to poll except to protect my backside: my BS detector reads red about 3♥ rather than Pass.

But all this begs the questions for the more experienced players reading here: what should Double be and what does the extreme hesitation suggest ? They won the tournament, if that is relevant.

[sanst]

FWIIW: E has given a pretty good description of his hand: no hearts support, no MF, possibly a stopper in spades. After west's 2♡ E could raise with two hearts, but doesn't, instead doubles. If that's take out, I'm wondering what he would have done after 3♧ from W. E could even put 2NT or 3◇ on the table. No, I don't believe it's take out but penalties. W has made clear what his hand is and should have passed. The hesitation makes clear that E isn't sure about the double and W is making use of the UI. So 2♤x making for NS.