bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings :: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient

Liu

Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 08:53:34 SunAug 10 2003 )

Country: Singapore

102

AQ2

Q10632

AQ6

KQ75

J843

943

AK54

10984

K753

A96

K108765

J2
The Bidding
North East South West
1D P 1H P
2H P 3C P
4H All Pass

The Facts:
There was no alert for 3C. After the hand was played East-West approached the director to lodge a complaint against their opponents, claiming that had they knew that 3C was not a suit West could have led a spade and brought the contract down. They also objected to the fact that the opponents did not have a convention card and thus the TD must ruled the infraction as misinformation. They cite an two earlier incidents when the director was also called as examples of N-S's unorthodox methods (The TD was called and dismissed both incidents - one was when North opened 3rd in hand nonV weak 2 on KQ10xx, and the other was when South opened 1NT with a balanced 16 count and 5-hearts) The TD approached North-South for an explanation of their auction. North-South claimed they were using simple Standard methods, that 3C invites the partner to bid game if he has values in the suit.

The Director's Findings:
The action of North supported his explanation of his partner�s call and it was thus decided that there had been no misinformation.

The Director's Ruling:
The TD allowed the table result, 4H making 10 tricks, to stand but caution North-South that normally opponents are entitled to expect 3C to be based on at least a 3-card suit and that if they continued to bid on a doubleton they would have to alert in future and give adequate explanation to their opponents. The TD further indicated that he would make a note of the hand and watch out for future complaints against North-South for similar incidents. East-West appealed.

The Committee's Finding:
3C as �help-suit� game try is natural and doesn�t require an alert. In addition, East-West could have defeated 4H. The committee upheld the ruling.

Deposit
The deposit is refunded.

Do you agree with the decisions?

Earl_Purple

79 posts
bridgetalk member

Re: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 12:59:39 SunAug 10 2003 )

I agree with the decisions except perhaps the returning of the deposit.

N/S should probably have a convention card though.

However E/W sound like one of those pairs who can't bear losing and will go by any means (i.e. calling the director) to overturn a bad result.

James Vickers

Re: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 16:34:05 ThuAug 14 2003 )

Country: UK

I don't quite understand the basis for the appeal. If they had been told that NS didn't have CLUBS they would have led SPADES??? There may be some logic behind this reasoning, but I'd like to have this explained before I would consider giving EW any redress.

Not only do you have to show there was misinformation, you also need to show that this caused the damage. What did they lead, anyway?

James

Liu

Re: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 04:33:46 FriAug 15 2003 )

West led a club, in an effort to try to give his partner a ruff.

Guest

Re: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 09:22:39 FriAug 15 2003 )

Country: Scotland

I would totally agree with ruling, but EW could (and probably should) have asked about 3C, especially when trying to base a defence on a speculative rough.

Here in Scotland with have a strange scenario in that both long suit trial bids (needing help) and values showing trial bids(need help elsewhere) are non-alertable and as such if you suspect the opposition to have made a trial bid then it is a necessity to ask to find out which trial bid has been used

bluejak

426 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Is the Appeal Committee too Lenient ( 13:25:52 TueAug 19 2003 )

The ruling and appeal look OK. N/S should be warned about the lack of a convention card though.

E/W sound a nagging pair, don't they? They should not demand rulings, they may not tell the TD that lack of a convention card means they get a ruling, and the two previous things they cite are the most minor of minor deviations. Furthermore, 4

goes off so long as East makes the obvious spade switch whatever the lead.

Incidentally, the diagram is very difficult to read. The software does not allow multiple spaces! You should either use dots, or use the PRE facility - and it is always worth reviewing what you are going to send before you do. But do not worry this time - it was clear enough.

---
David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com>
Liverpool, England, UK
http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

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

Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

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

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 StevensonSenior Consultant DirectorEnglish Bridge Union

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