[pran]

bluejak, on Aug 24 2010, 03:39 PM, said:

I find that people often get confused between the various adjusted scores, and I think the fact that they all begin with 'a' is a help to confuse.

I was very often confused myself before I got familiar with the terms, but only with the adjective "assigned", never with the verb "assign" or "assigns".

[lexlogan]

bluejak, on Aug 23 2010, 02:23 PM, said:

lexlogan, on Aug 21 2010, 05:51 AM, said:

He calls the director and states he would like East to confirm whether Michaels (i.e., length in both majors) is, in fact, the partnership agreement. If I were director, I would be inclined to make sure South understood that the answer would be authorized information for West, and then (per Law 20 F) instruct East to answer "yes" or "no", "Is that your partnership agreement?"

The EBU makes a strong recommendation that if there is doubt as to the possibility of MI you should call the TD immediately, so it is reasonable for this player to do so.

If I was the TD I would take both players away from the table separately to find out as best I could what their agreement actually is. If I believe declarer had been misinformed I would tell him so.

Thanks, David, that seems sensible and I will pass it on to the director at the time. It seems East had already answered South's question by the time the director was called, but he could at least explain proper procedure for the future.

[Trecar]

Quote

The EBU makes a strong recommendation that if there is doubt as to the possibility of MI you should call the TD immediately, so it is reasonable for this player to do so.

If I was the TD I would take both players away from the table separately to find out as best I could what their agreement actually is. If I believe declarer had been misinformed I would tell him so.

Whereas I am not experienced enough to dispute Bluejacks approach, I do wonder whether unless the sight of dummy makes it apparent that the explanation may be incorrect, the TD's presence at the table before the end of play creates further problems.

West would understand that South doubts his explanation even with careful removal in turn of the players, and thus would give him UI. I think that I would advise South to play to the information given, and recall me if he has been the victim of MI.

To do otherwise leaves you judging Wests play for UI.

[bluejak]

Life is hard. UI is a fact of life, and giving it or receiving it is not illegal. But MI is different: it is illegal, and we want to stop it as much as possible.

There may be UI problems, but that is tough. It is important that people get the correct information as to system.