UI on asking about an artificial bid is there UI or not?
#1
Posted 2015-April-27, 09:29
East has a hand that is a clear-cut takeout double of a weak 2 in spades, and an equally clear-cut initial pass if it is a weak 2 in hearts. He asks what the bid means, explained as a weak hand with 5 hearts and 4 of a minor. He passes.
South passes.
West makes a re-opening double, not showing anything specific.
North passes, East passes for penalty, South bids 2♠, West doubles for penalty
North bids 3♦, East doubles for penalty, South bids 3♥, West passes
Noth passes, East doubles again for penalty, passed out.
NS get a disastrous score, and ask for an adjustment to 2♥ undoubled, because West had UI from East's question.
* * *
Is there UI? The meaning of the opening bid was completely unknown and East needed to know what it was. Surely there is "I" but not "UI". ???
If this is UI, it gives complete freedom to any pair to invent an artificial opening bid, and not suffer any consequences when it goes wrong, but to gain the advantage when it does not.
#3
Posted 2015-April-27, 10:08
The only way they'd get to play 2♥ undoubled is if west's double was made with an unreasonable hand. One way of determining this is to ask other players what they would have done with west's cards in the same situation, where they are informed on what the 2♥ opening meant.
#4
Posted 2015-April-27, 10:34
#5
Posted 2015-April-27, 14:22
paulg, on 2015-April-27, 09:49, said:
Only if your name is George S. Patton.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#6
Posted 2015-April-27, 14:28
This same North would have a gripe when the auction went 2♥!-contented, after suitable pause and no question, pass-pass-pass and West's hand was the same, but "of course used the fact that partner didn't care about what 2♥ meant when deciding not to balance - and anything he does besides pass is 500 at least." So, what is poor East supposed to do?
Now, I could always investigate, decide whether pass was an LA to double, and all the rest, and then fine N/S a full board penalty for not following CC regulations that required E/W to provide the UI N/S then nailed them for. I would offer the same deal to them if they were the traditional ACBL "CC cushion" or "it's in my purse" players, and then complained that East asking for the CC passed the same UI.
#7
Posted 2015-April-28, 09:23
Kungsgeten, on 2015-April-27, 10:08, said:
So a follow-up question. Is it UI if East looks at the convention card (if there is one) after the opening bid?
If not, why not?
#8
Posted 2015-April-28, 09:30
barmar, on 2015-April-27, 10:34, said:
This is the West hand
It seems like a pretty normal reopening double to me, when it seems the points are about evenly split.
#9
Posted 2015-April-28, 17:04
fromageGB, on 2015-April-27, 09:29, said:
How on earth is East supposed to bid his hand without knowing if the bid is this, that or something else?
Under these (ahem) unusual CoC it should be mandatory to ask and not doing so should be the cause of UI.
What is baby oil made of?
#11
Posted 2015-April-29, 10:27
If, however, the player doesn't always ask then there is UI. I would expect this to be the most common situation.
#12
Posted 2015-April-29, 10:38
Lanor Fow, on 2015-April-29, 10:27, said:
I would expect my partners only to ask if they don't know what the bid means. If partner only asks when the meaning of the bid is unknown, and I understand their knowledge base (which I normally do, so I know they don't know) and the auction is one that is competitive or likely to become so, is there really any UI? (I'm talking about any bids, not just stop bids.)
#13
Posted 2015-April-29, 11:10
More seriously, 2♦ Alert. Sure, it could - likely is - Multi w/ or w/o strong options, or it could be an EHAA 2♦ opener. So, do you have a defence to 2♦ hearts or spades or diamonds, except that responder knows which suit(s) it can't be and your partner doesn't?
I, too would assume that passing without asking would be *much* more UI-generating than asking, given that 2♥ could be EHAA hearts, or Muiderberg Hearts-and (and the "and" could be different if it could include spades or not), or spades, or spades-or-minors, or even "rounds or pointeds", or...
#14
Posted 2015-April-29, 15:49
barmar, on 2015-April-29, 08:52, said:
There is a huge difference here, as mycroft indicated. I bet these players you mention know that the opening is a Polish club, or whatever.
If the opening bid is completely unknown as to content, how can it give UI to ask what it is?
Let me also repeat my second question : does your interpretation of the rules tell you that UI is given when you look at the opponent's convention card (if they had one) ?
Finally, I have given the hand of the West player who made the reopening double. Would you say this is based upon UI?
#15
Posted 2015-April-29, 18:06
ggwhiz, on 2015-April-28, 17:04, said:
Under these (ahem) unusual CoC it should be mandatory to ask and not doing so should be the cause of UI.
A 2♥ bid as a preempt in any suit including hearts is not allowed at level 4, but some tournaments and most clubs have looser system restrictions.
#16
Posted 2015-April-30, 04:27
StevenG, on 2015-April-29, 10:38, said:
If they always ask when they don't know, then there is no UI, but it might be difficult to convince a director of that (especially if playing against a pair who have seen your partner not ask about alerted bids already in the round).
If they only ask if they don't know and the auction is competitive, or might become so, then there is judgement involved, which is likely to be partly based on their hand. In this case, there is UI passed.
#17
Posted 2015-April-30, 05:52
#18
Posted 2015-April-30, 06:39
barmar, on 2015-April-29, 08:52, said:
I read the OP differently. (And I may be wrong.)
I understood that the 2♥ bid was not a Multi type bid. The CoC were such that the 2♥ opening was allowed to show any specific weak two, i.e. in a known suit, but not necessarily in hearts. In addition, both a natural weak two in hearts and a weak two in a specific other suit were alertable. The OP needed to ask about the 2♥ bid because he wanted to know whether it was a weak two in hearts, or whether it was a weak two in some other (but known) suit.
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#19
Posted 2015-April-30, 09:33
mycroft, on 2015-April-29, 11:10, said:
I misunderstood the intent of ggwhiz's post. I thought he was wondering how East was supposed to deal with a bid that could be "weak 2 in any suit". I forgot that the context of the thread is about whether East should be allowed to ask about the alert, not what to do after getting the explanation.
#20
Posted 2015-April-30, 09:37
Normally, you would expect that a passed hand would have little to think about. So just passing would convey little information. But asking suggests that there's something unusual about the hand that he originally passed -- maybe it's a maximum pass, or has shape that would take action depending on the meaning of the bid?