[CSGibson]

Cascade, on Aug 19 2010, 05:03 AM, said:

CSGibson, on Aug 13 2010, 05:55 PM, said:

East-West play transfers over big clubs, but W forgot and did not alert E's transfer.

This is wrong isn't it. West bid 1♥ east must have forgotten.

Anyway I am not convinced that NS are entitled to full redress here.

North asked South to hit 1♥.

South decided not to cooperate with ♥ AQJ9. South knew either:

1. 1♥ was not bid with hearts

2. partner did not have a penalty pass

I think there is a significant chance that if south had hit 1♥ that they could later have a sensible auction to 6♥ or 7♥.

"Law12C1B If, subsequent to the irregularity, the non-offending side has
contributed to its own damage by a serious error (unrelated to the
infraction) or by wild or gambling action it does not receive relief in the
adjustment for such part of the damage as is self-inflicted. The offending
side should be awarded the score that it would have been allotted as the
consequence of its infraction only."

I would class 3NT as a "wild or gambling action". "Wild or gambling" because south had the opportunity to carve up 1♥ for 1700 or have a semi-sensible auction to a more normal contract. 3NT by taking away nearly three-levels of bidding pre-empts the auction and gambles that 3NT is the right spot.

In this case the failure to alert did not damage NS it was the subsequent pre-emptive 3NT that caused the damage.

You don't fully know the methods employed. Assuming the 1♥ bid was natural, North would:

X with a game force, no clear direction
bid 1♠ as a takeout of hearts
bid 1N showing a limited hand with 5+ spades
bid 2C or 2D, Natural & limited
transfers starting at 2N

So a pass showed some sort of balanced limited hand or a penalty pass. S (me) looked at his own holding & decided it was not a penalty pass, and also decided slam was not on opposite a limited balanced hand. The jump to 3N was according to the partnership style, which is to place the contract where you think it should be as soon as you think you know, disclosing as little as possible and letting opponents exchange as little information as possible.

To call this action wild and gambling is ludicrous.

[lamford]

I bid this with my occasional Precision partner, and we had no difficulty reaching a grand after 1C* -(1H*) - 2NT (either 5-5+ game forcing or a single suited slam try) -3C (what do you have) - 3H - (hearts and something) - 3S - (what is something) - 4D - (diamonds) - 4NT (multiple key card for both suits) - 5D (two - one is assumed from the 2NT bid) - 7H; we seemed to have a huge amount of spare room, so once North decides his hand is worth 2NT opposite a strong club (a slight overbid in my view) it would be easy.

It seems from the comments that players with simple methods will tend to get a lower percentage of their best score on the basis that they would not have reached the best contract anyway. This seems a bit harsh, and North who is looking at the 5-5 might well take control when he finds a heart fit.

[jeremy69]

Quote

To call this action wild and gambling is ludicrous.

Agree with that. South was set a problem he should not have been set, he deduced from his hand that partner was unlikely to hold a penalty double and made a perfectly reasonable stab at game. I'll go further. If you gave this hand to 100 strong clubplayers for whom the pass of 1H natural was as the system here then a very high % would bid 3NT.