Discussion:
Blue Ribbon appeal
(too old to reply)
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-01 15:04:28 UTC
Permalink
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.

I'm fine with the outcome, but:

Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.

Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it.

Another interesting question: If South had doubled after his long tank, and Glubok had found the diamond lead, would the table result still have been rolled back?

Finally interesting question: What SHOULD South have done? Passed in tempo and prayed that partner had KQ of D? Or doubled in tempo hoping that that should mean 'I have an ace. Lead the suit where the ace is most likely to go away if we don't get it now. or possibly: Lead the only suit where I could conceivably have an ace if this auction makes any sense and Bobby Levin didn't miscount keycards.'
Hotzenplotz
2018-12-02 06:11:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.
Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it.
Another interesting question: If South had doubled after his long tank, and Glubok had found the diamond lead, would the table result still have been rolled back?
Finally interesting question: What SHOULD South have done? Passed in tempo and prayed that partner had KQ of D? Or doubled in tempo hoping that that should mean 'I have an ace. Lead the suit where the ace is most likely to go away if we don't get it now. or possibly: Lead the only suit where I could conceivably have an ace if this auction makes any sense and Bobby Levin didn't miscount keycards.'
"Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it. "

I am curious why you would say that. I think the result should have stood. The stupid comment was ruled irrelevant. I don't think it was. Also some players when polled chose a D lead.
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-02 08:34:41 UTC
Permalink
Why am I 'fine with the outcome'?

Because I'm wary of any 'landmark' ruling that lets someone wake his partner up for free by tanking for a minute in the passout seat against 7N and then passing. He's saying "I have an Ace, partner." That cannot be permitted under any circumstances.

Maybe Glubok was always finding the diamond lead if his partner acts in tempo, maybe he wasn't, we'll never know. Half of the polled experts didn't, that's enough to rule against him.

I would add that I agree with those who disapprove of the "It was the unethical use of partner’s BIT that produced the diamond lead" language in the ruling. Grue's comment muddied the water enough that I don't think that language is appropriate.

Anyway, the whole thing's a mess. Hopefully the message to be gleaned from this ruling is that you shouldn't take advantage of partner's tempo during the bidding (see my #SayNoToTheirCheats thread for a textbook example of that) and not that top pros always win in committee because reasons.
Hotzenplotz
2018-12-03 02:23:14 UTC
Permalink
snipped

No Jonathon, "Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it. " This is the comment I am curious about.
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-03 03:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hotzenplotz
snipped
No Jonathon, "Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it. " This is the comment I am curious about.
I'm not the only one who thinks that's the case. It's not something I can prove, though.

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/hnl-blue-ribbon-ad-mia/?cj=735264#c735264
Hotzenplotz
2018-12-03 09:21:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Post by Hotzenplotz
snipped
No Jonathon, "Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it. " This is the comment I am curious about.
I'm not the only one who thinks that's the case. It's not something I can prove, though.
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/hnl-blue-ribbon-ad-mia/?cj=735264#c735264
I wasnt being critical Jonathon, just curious. After all Glubock is a well known plyer as well
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-03 09:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hotzenplotz
I wasnt being critical Jonathon, just curious. After all Glubock is a well known plyer as well
I wasn't rustled by your question. I just don't have much to add. It's a hunch. Maybe an educated hunch, but still a hunch.
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-02 18:17:16 UTC
Permalink
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace,...
Funny, got to 7N missing an ace today in a BAM challenge. Even sent it back.

Loading Image...
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-03 18:12:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace,...
Funny, got to 7N missing an ace today in a BAM challenge. Even sent it back.
https://i.postimg.cc/mDZ117N7/Screenshot-139.png
Full Disclosure Update: My success rate at redoubling 7N contracts missing an ace this past weekend has dropped to 50%. (Luckily the 'advanced bots' (used in the NABC Individual event) don't seem to perpetrate nearly as many ridiculous auctions like this.)

Loading Image...
Lorne
2018-12-03 12:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.
Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it.
Another interesting question: If South had doubled after his long tank, and Glubok had found the diamond lead, would the table result still have been rolled back?
Finally interesting question: What SHOULD South have done? Passed in tempo and prayed that partner had KQ of D? Or doubled in tempo hoping that that should mean 'I have an ace. Lead the suit where the ace is most likely to go away if we don't get it now. or possibly: Lead the only suit where I could conceivably have an ace if this auction makes any sense and Bobby Levin didn't miscount keycards.'
It is always sad when a big event is decided by a ruling but much worse
things would happen if there were no rules and everybody played as if it
was the wild west.

As for this case the bulletin write up says the tank was for 'about a
minute'. This is an outrageous time to spend passing 7N and the player
concerned deserved to pay for it, although I do not understand why the
person on lead did not say that Grue's comment told him what to lead as
I think the lead is stand out once you have been told by Grue that he
bid 7N carelessly by not considering the possibility that his partner's
first round control in diamonds could be a void (and quite likely was
given the distribution shown in other suits). It was obvious that Grue
diod not have the ace because an ealy call had denied it and the comment
makes no sense unless he had just realised the error of his 7N bid.
Dave Flower
2018-12-06 09:16:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.
Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it.
Another interesting question: If South had doubled after his long tank, and Glubok had found the diamond lead, would the table result still have been rolled back?
Finally interesting question: What SHOULD South have done? Passed in tempo and prayed that partner had KQ of D? Or doubled in tempo hoping that that should mean 'I have an ace. Lead the suit where the ace is most likely to go away if we don't get it now. or possibly: Lead the only suit where I could conceivably have an ace if this auction makes any sense and Bobby Levin didn't miscount keycards.'
This thread was the first I heard of the incident.
What was the comment ?

Dave Flower
Kenny McCormack
2018-12-06 13:21:30 UTC
Permalink
In article <eeaeed06-2f6e-4e7e-8ab3-***@googlegroups.com>,
Dave Flower <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
...
Post by Dave Flower
This thread was the first I heard of the incident.
What was the comment ?
From the outset, this thread has been weird because the OP included no
details about what the h*** he was talking about.

It's one of those threads where the OP expects either that:

1) Everybody is already familiar with the underlying events. I.e., the
assumption is that everybody lives in the same thought bubble as him.
or:
2) That readers are willing to do their own googling to figure it out.

In either case, it would have been nice if OP had included a URL.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world."

- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden -
Lorne
2018-12-06 15:11:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Flower
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.
Had the situation been reversed, and it was Levin/Grue who had to find the diamond lead, and there was the same tank, would the ruling have been the same? I seriously doubt it.
Another interesting question: If South had doubled after his long tank, and Glubok had found the diamond lead, would the table result still have been rolled back?
Finally interesting question: What SHOULD South have done? Passed in tempo and prayed that partner had KQ of D? Or doubled in tempo hoping that that should mean 'I have an ace. Lead the suit where the ace is most likely to go away if we don't get it now. or possibly: Lead the only suit where I could conceivably have an ace if this auction makes any sense and Bobby Levin didn't miscount keycards.'
This thread was the first I heard of the incident.
What was the comment ?
Dave Flower
For those who do not know what happened, the pair who won the appeal and
as a result the competition bid and made 7N with a void diamond opposite
Qxx after a Diamond lead made at the table was ruled inadmissable
because partner tanked for about a minute before passing 7N.

Screens were in use.

Grue is the player who removed 7S (which was cold) to 7N and he realised
his error during the tank and said 'I should not have done that - he may
be void'.

The 7S bidder had use blackwood with a void diamond after finding out
his partner did not have the diamond ace (so he knew the response was
for non-diamond key cards).
ais523
2018-12-07 00:05:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Flower
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed
to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what
my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
[snip]
Post by Dave Flower
This thread was the first I heard of the incident.
What was the comment ?
Given that some of the details are relevant, it's probably best to give
the information that North had at the time of the opening lead in full:

S W N E
- 1H - 1S
- 3S - 4C
- 4D X -
- 4NT - 5S
- 7S - 7NT
...- - -

South's pass over 7NT was clearly slow (and despite screens being in
use, the break in tempo was clearly attributable to South because West
has no legal call over 7NT but passing). East's pass over North's double
denied the Ace of Diamonds, and denied a void in diamonds
(specifically; it didn't deny any other holding). 4NT was a Blackwood
variant; 5S showed two key cards and the Queen of Spades.

After bidding 7NT, while waiting for the return of the tray, East said
something like "Maybe I should not have done that because partner might
be void."

North's hand is:

S 73
H 642
D KJ843
C T42

North lead a diamond. The appeal was about whether this lead was
acceptable given the break in tempo (and whether the comment by East
made it acceptable).

As mentioned elsethread, it's an interesting hypothetical problem as to
what leads would be allowed if South had /doubled/ slowly, rather than
passing slowly.

From my point of view, there'd be no alternative to a diamond lead after
a double of 7NT; assuming Lightner doubles or a related system, South
is looking for a specific lead, but not hearts or spades (declarer's
suits, which are always discounted by a double), and didn't double 4C,
meaning that the desired lead must be diamonds by elimination. I think
the argument of "if South doubles, they must have an Ace, and the Ace
of Diamonds is the only Ace that our opponents can plausibly have had
a bidding misunderstanding about" is perhaps also valid, but weaker.
The combination, of course, is stronger than either individually.
--
ais523
Hotzenplotz
2018-12-07 00:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
Post by Dave Flower
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
As the reigning NABC Individual Champion, an event I somehow managed
to win without bidding 7N missing an ace, you're probably curious what
my take is on the whole Blue Ribbon appeal.
[snip]
Post by Dave Flower
This thread was the first I heard of the incident.
What was the comment ?
Given that some of the details are relevant, it's probably best to give
S W N E
- 1H - 1S
- 3S - 4C
- 4D X -
- 4NT - 5S
- 7S - 7NT
...- - -
South's pass over 7NT was clearly slow (and despite screens being in
use, the break in tempo was clearly attributable to South because West
has no legal call over 7NT but passing). East's pass over North's double
denied the Ace of Diamonds, and denied a void in diamonds
(specifically; it didn't deny any other holding). 4NT was a Blackwood
variant; 5S showed two key cards and the Queen of Spades.
After bidding 7NT, while waiting for the return of the tray, East said
something like "Maybe I should not have done that because partner might
be void."
S 73
H 642
D KJ843
C T42
North lead a diamond. The appeal was about whether this lead was
acceptable given the break in tempo (and whether the comment by East
made it acceptable).
As mentioned elsethread, it's an interesting hypothetical problem as to
what leads would be allowed if South had /doubled/ slowly, rather than
passing slowly.
From my point of view, there'd be no alternative to a diamond lead after
a double of 7NT; assuming Lightner doubles or a related system, South
is looking for a specific lead, but not hearts or spades (declarer's
suits, which are always discounted by a double), and didn't double 4C,
meaning that the desired lead must be diamonds by elimination. I think
the argument of "if South doubles, they must have an Ace, and the Ace
of Diamonds is the only Ace that our opponents can plausibly have had
a bidding misunderstanding about" is perhaps also valid, but weaker.
The combination, of course, is stronger than either individually.
--
ais523
As D had been doubled earlier in the auction, a number of players would say a double now says don't lead a D but lead something else. By the way, the comment was rued as irrelevant during the appeal. That is the height of idiocy. The fact that there even was an appeal shows that some players will resort to any tactics to win an event.
ais523
2018-12-07 00:53:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hotzenplotz
As D had been doubled earlier in the auction, a number of players
would say a double now says don't lead a D but lead something else. By
the way, the comment was rued as irrelevant during the appeal. That is
the height of idiocy. The fact that there even was an appeal shows
that some players will resort to any tactics to win an event.
D had been doubled by the opening leader, though. It's certainly
possible to play that a double by the defender off lead tells the
defender on lead not to lead the suit they doubled; however, I don't
think that agreement is particularly common.

Double to say "don't lead /my/ suit" is rather more common, but that
would require the defender off lead to have doubled diamonds, rather
than the defender on lead.
--
ais523
Steve Willner
2018-12-06 20:55:23 UTC
Permalink
The (preliminary) appeal writeup and almost 1000 comments are at
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/honolulu-brp-7nt-lead-discussion/
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Grue's comment tainted the whole auction. Don't make stupid comments like that.
While I agree the comment was unwise, why do you say "tainted the whole
auction?"
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
The stupid comment was ruled irrelevant. I don't think it was.
The Director's polling included the "stupid comment," as was proper.
It's not clear whether the panel's polling did; if not, it should have.
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
Also some players when polled chose a D lead.
The relevant thing is that some players polled -- about half of them, in
fact -- _failed_ to find a D lead without the UI.
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
by tanking for a minute in the passout seat against 7N and then
passing. He's saying "I have an Ace, partner." That cannot be
permitted under any circumstances.
Indeed!
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
I agree with those who disapprove of the "It was the unethical use
ofpartner’s BIT that produced the diamond lead" language in the
ruling.
The writeup could have been clearer, and I hope the final version is,
but that accusation seems to have been made by the appellants rather
than being a finding of the panel. It was unwise and unnecessary for
the appellants to have written that, but it would have been grossly
improper for the panel to have done so.
KWSchneider
2018-12-07 00:52:43 UTC
Permalink
Can someone explain to me why balancer didn’t double? This would make it abundantly clear that he had an Ace, the suit of which was easily deduced. Was he spending his minute working out the IMP math of declarer making doubled vs undoubled?
Kenny McCormack
2018-12-07 06:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Can someone explain to me why balancer didn’t double? This would
make it abundantly clear that he had an Ace, the suit of which was
easily deduced. Was he spending his minute working out the IMP math of
declarer making doubled vs undoubled?
Wasn't this a pairs (MPs) event?

I assumed so, since only in MP scoring is the conversion from 7S to 7N at
all reasonable. Even at MP scoring, it was really, really stupid.

All in all, the conversion to 7N was the root of the problem on this hand.
--
If Jeb is Charlie Brown kicking a football-pulled-away, Mitt is a '50s
housewife with a black eye who insists to her friends the roast wasn't
dry.
Bruce Evans
2018-12-07 14:24:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny McCormack
Can someone explain to me why balancer didn’t double? This would
make it abundantly clear that he had an Ace, the suit of which was
easily deduced. Was he spending his minute working out the IMP math of
declarer making doubled vs undoubled?
Wasn't this a pairs (MPs) event?
Yes.

I replied to this before but forgot to mention this, but wrote about
Lightner doubles. Doubling 7NT with an Ace is even less useful with
IMP scoring. The extra 50 or 100 for doubling is worth only a couple
of imps when it works. The double could reasonably be Lightner at
IMPs (but probably shouldn't be since this is only very useful against
opponents who bid 7NT missing an Ace). At matchpoints, you might want
to double without an ace in the more common case that 7NT is the normal
contract but is down on bad breaks.
Post by Kenny McCormack
I assumed so, since only in MP scoring is the conversion from 7S to 7N at
all reasonable. Even at MP scoring, it was really, really stupid.
Going down on a ruff in 7S when you have 16 top tricks in 7NT is stupid
at any scoring. There were in fact closer to 16 top tricks than 13.
The stupidness was misjudging an Ace.

Bruce
KWSchneider
2018-12-07 23:48:30 UTC
Permalink
Lightner doubles for an unusual lead make sense against Trump slams, and perhaps make sense against a small notrump slam, but REALLY - against a grand slam it must signify an Ace.
ais523
2018-12-08 00:09:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by KWSchneider
Lightner doubles for an unusual lead make sense against Trump slams,
and perhaps make sense against a small notrump slam, but REALLY -
against a grand slam it must signify an Ace.
I'd normally expect a double against a grand to signify a void, but in
the case of 7NT specifically, it pretty much has to be an Ace.
--
ais523
KWSchneider
2018-12-10 02:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Yes - a Lightner double specifies “partner, if you lead the right suit, I have a otherwise unexpected trick for you”. Clearly the right call against 7N with an Ace.
Bruce Evans
2018-12-07 14:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Can someone explain to me why balancer didn’t double? This would make
it abundantly clear that he had an Ace, the suit of which was easily
deduced. Was he spending his minute working out the IMP math of declarer
making doubled vs undoubled?
No one knows, or if so they won't tell us, although knowing is necessary
for answering polls and making a ruling, and for discussing the rulling
in possibly less than the 1000 posts now on Bridgewinners.

A bridge reason is that a double would be Lightner for a non-diamond
lead.

A semi-bridge reason is that the hand with the Ace didn't know if a
double would be Lightner and misguessed that the slow pass would cause
smaller problems to not take advantage of the UI than a slow double.

A non-bridge reason is unmentionable.

When opening leader and the Rulers determine what is suggested by the UI,
they must take into account that the hesitation might have been caused by
forgetting if Lightner applies, even if the the leader is firm and the
leader wouldn't forget it. Taking everything into account is impossibly
difficult even without this. The only things that are clear is that the
slow action suggests an Ace and the slow pass suggests that the passer
thinks that Lightner is on or doesn't know if Lightner is off.

Bruce
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-07 01:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Sorry I didn't provide any link/reference/background in my OP. Indeed, I should have.

I've been waiting for someone to capture my thoughts on this perfectly and lo and behold, someone did:

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/honolulu-brp-7nt-lead-discussion/?cj=736674#c736674

Thanks Boye!
Steve Willner
2018-12-11 21:20:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Ferguson
I've been waiting for someone to capture my thoughts on this
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/honolulu-brp-7nt-lead-discussion/?cj=736674#c736674
How did you create the link to a specific comment on BW?

David Burn also had some cogent things to say.

The event was matchpoints: the Blue Ribbon final. Neither side at the
table was a regular partnership, and there was probably no explicit
agreement about the pass of the double and almost certainly none about
what a double of 7NT would have meant. As to the latter, Kit Woolsey
wrote that he plays double as "I have an ace somewhere; please try to
guess where."
Jonathan Ferguson
2018-12-12 21:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Willner
How did you create the link to a specific comment on BW?
I have a special 'in' with Eugene. He lets VIPs link specific comments.

But seriously, in this case Boye made the comment, so you click on his name (that takes you to his profile.) Then you click on the comments tab. Then you click on the comment you want to link. Then a link to that comment will appear in your http:// bar (the navigation bar or the address bar or whatever you call it.) And you can copy and paste that.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...