MI Ruling

[Wes Powers]

ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.

S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32

The auction:

W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP

(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.

2S was down 3.

After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)

South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.

Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by Wes Powers
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here?

No. The bid was alerted, which means that it might surprise the
opponents. They chose to assume that they knew NS's agreements.
They were wrong.

Post by Wes Powers
Do they give up their rights by not asking the meaning of the
alerted 2D bid?

By not asking and not checking the system card.

[dfm]

Post by Wes Powers
ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.
S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

Whatever North thought the agreement was, it sounds like the alert woke him up. If he thought 2D was a weak two, either 2S was forcing and he passed it, or it was nonforcing and he failed to alert it.

[Barry Margolin]

Post by dfm

Post by Wes Powers
ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.
S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

Whatever North thought the agreement was, it sounds like the alert woke him
up. If he thought 2D was a weak two, either 2S was forcing and he passed it,
or it was nonforcing and he failed to alert it.

I know non-forcing is alertable in an uncontested auction. Is it really
alertable after the double?

[dfm]

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by dfm

Post by Wes Powers
ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.
S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

Whatever North thought the agreement was, it sounds like the alert woke him
up. If he thought 2D was a weak two, either 2S was forcing and he passed it,
or it was nonforcing and he failed to alert it.

I know non-forcing is alertable in an uncontested auction. Is it really
alertable after the double?
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

I don't see anything in the ACBL alert procedures that says the double makes a difference, but maybe I'm missing something.

[Fred.]

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by dfm

Post by Wes Powers
ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.
S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

Whatever North thought the agreement was, it sounds like the alert woke him
up. If he thought 2D was a weak two, either 2S was forcing and he passed it,
or it was nonforcing and he failed to alert it.

I know non-forcing is alertable in an uncontested auction. Is it really
alertable after the double?
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

The ACBL 4/16 _Alert Procedures_, "Part 5" says: "Note: A non-forcing suit
response to a weak two-bid requires an Alert.", without specifying any
exceptions. Personally, I have a had time picturing a hand which should
make a forcing response to a 3rd hand weak 2, with or without an
intervening double. Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders
already put off by a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.

Fred.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off by
a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's previous
pass.

You mean:

Perhaps the ACBL feels that defenders already put off
by a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.

or

Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off
by a preempt should have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.

[Fred.]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off by
a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's previous
pass.

Perhaps the ACBL feels that defenders already put off
by a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
or
Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off
by a preempt should have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
--
/Bertel

Yes, one or both.

Fred.

[Fred.]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off by
a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's previous
pass.

Perhaps the ACBL feels that defenders already put off
by a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
or
Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off
by a preempt should have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
--
/Bertel

But, what I really meant was "Why on Earth should players need
to alert what appears to be the only sensible interpretation of a
bid?". Even with a sound opening and a heavy pass, I can't
picture having enough to force over a weak two. I think we're
going too far in accommodating sleeping at the table.

Fred.

[Barry Margolin]

Post by Fred.

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off by
a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's previous
pass.

Perhaps the ACBL feels that defenders already put off
by a preempt shouldn't have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
or
Perhaps the ACBL doesn't feel that defenders already put off
by a preempt should have to keep track of responder's
previous pass.
--
/Bertel

But, what I really meant was "Why on Earth should players need
to alert what appears to be the only sensible interpretation of a
bid?". Even with a sound opening and a heavy pass, I can't
picture having enough to force over a weak two. I think we're
going too far in accommodating sleeping at the table.
Fred.

I think it's mostly just an attempt to keep the Alert Procedures simple.
Having different rules for passed and unpassed hands complicates things.

[Fred.]

Post by Wes Powers
ACBL Club game.
All players experienced, but NS were not a regular partnership.
S-T95 Dlr: S
H-5 Vul: NS
D-KQJ873
C-J87
S-64 S-AQ82
H-AJT93 H-KQ42
D-T62 D-A
C-K65 C-AQ94
S-KJ73
H-876
D-954
C-T32
W N E S
-----------------------------------
Pass
Pass 2D(*) Dbl 2S
AP
(*) 2D was alerted. Neither East nor West asked for an explanation, but
virtually all players in this area play 2D as either a weak two or as
Flannery (5H, 4S, 11-15 HCP). So the alert strongly implied Flannery.
2S was down 3.
After the dummy came down, West called the TD and claimed that with
proper information, he would have bid hearts. It is clear that EW would
have found their heart game. (All other pairs in the room were in 4H
making 6 or 7.)
South thought their agreement was to play 2D as Flannery.
North thought their agreement was to play 2D as a weak two.
Is EW entitled to an adjustment here? Do they give up their rights by
not asking the meaning of the alerted 2D bid?

Just out of curiosity, did NS have matching cards? If so, hat was on them
for 2D? I suspect that a clear understanding that 2S was non-forcing
would have alerted West to EW's clear ownership of the hand and led
to West asking the right questions.

Fred.