bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings

Wotan

69 posts
bridgetalk member

High Level Decision ( 04:05:05 MonJan 27 2003 )

All Green IMPs

x
xx
AKQxxxxx
KQ

AKxxx
Ax
J
Jxxxx

(1D) P (1S) 2H
(3D) 4H (X) (P)
(5D) (P) (6D)

The 5D bid was made after a long hesitation by Nth. South then bid 6D. The
director was called and allowed the result to stand.
His comment was, "A slow 5D bid by Nth is less likely to induce a 6D bid
than a fast 5D".

What do you think of this ruling? If it were appealed, would you regard the
appeal as frivolous?

Ron Lel

bluejak

427 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: High Level Decision ( 12:31:54 MonJan 27 2003 )

In many [possibly most] UI situations, the UI hows something fairly obvious. Partner makes a slow penalty double, and it is clear he would be happy to hear it removed with an unsuitable hand - and the reverse is that a quick, happy double is one that partner would like you to leave in whatever.

In this case, the first question is: What does a slow 5

show?

It could be that he was considering defending 4

, perhaps taking it out because of fear that it might make. Alternatively it could be that he is wondering whether 5

is enough, considering a more encouraging bid.

The problem as far as deciding what to rule is that these two views work in different ways. If he was considering passing, then this suggests that 6

now is wrong: if he was considering doing more, then this suggests that 6

is right.

So I agree with the TD. South is on a guess, and the hesitation from partner does not really help [apart from the fact that he is not allowed to use it].

Suppose South had passed rather than bid 6

, and North had a hand that was borderline whether to defend 4

, so 6

does not make. Now the defence would be asking for an adjustment to 6

-1.

While I think this ruling fairly clear, others might disagree on the bridge judgement. For that reason, an appeal is not frivolous.

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

JimO

175 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: High Level Decision ( 16:20:57 MonJan 27 2003 )

Law 16A states, in part:
"After a player makes avalialbe to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play...the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could have demonstrably be suggested over another by the extraneous infomation".

I think Pass is a logical alternative to 6D.
But, what does the slow 5D suggest? That North was considering a different action, surely, but which action?
6D? 4S or 5C? Probably he was considering passing - in which case 6D is less likely to be successful.

I think I'd to let the result stand. But I would not find an appeal of this ruling to be frivolous.

---
-Jim O'Neil
Oak Park, IL

8 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 7 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