Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search
David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF
bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings :: Insufficient attention and bid

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union

To ask a question, click HERE and type in your message.
Please specify your country in your query where indicated.
Right click your mouse button for help on abbreviations.

Welcome, Register :: Log in 

View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ]

[ Get Email Advice of Replies ][ Print ][ Send ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ]

NeilThomson

6 posts
bridgetalk member

Reply
Insufficient attention and bid ( 13:33:58 ThuJun 12 2003 )

Country: Scotland

West as dealer opened 2D (8PT or bal 19/20) North not paying attention, bid 2c, East also not paying attention passed (some arguement as to wether East alerted 2D). Ruling was given that East accepted insufficient bid auction to progress from east's pass. South passed West dbld all pass
N/S lost 800 (-3 vul) at best E/W will play in 2NT making exactly 8.

Questions
Was ruling correct?
If no alert can north retract bid?
Should result stand?

  
RMB

19 posts
bridgetalk member

Reply
Re: Insufficient attention and bid ( 16:03:52 ThuJun 12 2003 )

Country: England

The auction started 2D-2C-P and now the TD is called.
Apart from the insufficient bid, there is the question of
whether 2D was alerted (assuming 2D is alertable).

If 2D was alerted before 2C there is no problem with the
alert and the pass accepts the insufficient bid. The
auction continues.

If 2D was alerted after 2C or not at all, and it became
clear that 2D was alertable, then the TD should consider
L21B1.

"Until the end of the auction period (see Law 17E), a player
may, without penalty, change a call when it is probable that
he made the call as a result of misinformation given to him
by an opponent (failure to alert promptly to a conventional
call or special understanding, where such alert is required
by the sponsoring organisation, is deemed misinformation),
provided that his partner has not subsequently called."

The TD could explain the law to North and tell him he can
change 2C if the law applies. Alternatively, the TD could
rule that is was in no way probable that North bid 2C as
a result of the failure to alert and no allow 2C to be changed.

Perhaps I would talk to North away from the table. I suppose
it is likely that had 2D been alerted he would have noticed
that it was 2D. Is this sufficient for L21B1 to apply?

Robin

  

View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ]

[ Get Email Advice of Replies ][ Print ][ Send ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ]

6 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 5 guest(s).
(The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003)
bluejak

 Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

Register :: Log in

The time is now 00:29:25 Wed Aug 27 2003

Powered By BbBoard V1.4.2
© 2001-2003 BbBoy.net
Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search
David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF

Legend :: Read Topic :: Unread Topic

Email Help | Full Format: ON :: OFF | Text: ON :: OFF | Email Status