[BLML] Controversial case (repost)

ROCAFORT Jean-Pierre jean-pierre.rocafort at meteo.fr
Mon Aug 19 14:15:42 CEST 2013



----- Mail original -----
> De: "Henk Uijterwaal" <henk.uijterwaal at gmail.com>
> À: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
> Envoyé: Lundi 19 Août 2013 13:51:29
> Objet: [BLML] Controversial case (repost)
> 
> 
> 
> Subject:
> controversial case
> From:
> Jeff Easterson <Jeff.Easterson at gmx.de>
> Date:
> 19/08/2013 13:47
> To:
> Bridge Laws Mailing List <blml at rtflb.org>
> 
> The following hand caused quite a controversy at a recent tournament.  Dealer
> S,
> all white, no screens
> 
>                        J
>                        10954
>                        KJ54
>                        Q985
> 
> 642                                  KQ10985
> 3                                      Q82
> Q1032                              976
> 76432                               10
> 
>                          A73
>                          AKJ76
>                          A8
>                          AKJ
> 
> Bidding:    S        W       N      E
>                  2he     ps      ps      2sp
>                  3NT    ps      4he    ps
>                  6he  all pass
> 
> Unusual bidding as you can see.
> 2he was (system card and info from N) weak, 5 hearts and another 5-card suit.
> West was a very strong player, NS unknown but apparently fairly weak.  The
> tournament did not have a very strong field and NS were 73rd (from 100) with
> 46%.
> When asked why she opened 2he, S said that she saw so many HCPs and didn't
> know
> what to do so bid 2he.
> 
> Analysis of TD at the table:  There was UI for S but her 3NT bid is
> acceptable;
> she knows she has 24 HCPs without the UI.  4 hearts is also normal since
> South's
> opening promises hearts.  North cannot know what South has.  After 3NT he
> knows
> that she is very strong and that 2he was a misbid.  He is also confident that
> she has hearts.
> The question arose about the 6he bid.    According to TBS §16B1(a) the
> receiver
> of UI (South in this case) may not choose an action suggested by the UI.  She
> knows her partner is weak (But she probably knows this without the UI since
> she
> has 24 HCPs and the opponents bid 2 spades; and she knows he prefers hearts.)
> But as far as we could see (the TDs at the tournament) 6he was not suggested
> by
> the UI; it was simply a guess (and probably not a very good one) that
> happened
> to be successful.
> 
> Your opinions?
you say S received UI, what was it? it was not apparent in your relation of facts. you also scrutinize N's 4H bid, why? did he also receive some unaccounted UI?
jpr
> 
> 
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk(at)uijterwaal.nl
>                                           http://www.uijterwaal.nl
>                                           Phone: +31.6.55861746
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Read my blog at http://www.uijterwaal.nl/henks_hands.html
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 

-- 
_______________________________________________
Jean-Pierre Rocafort
METEO-FRANCE
DSI/D/BP
42 Avenue Gaspard Coriolis
31057 Toulouse CEDEX
Tph: 05 61 07 81 02      (33 5 61 07 81 02)
Fax: 05 61 07 81 09      (33 5 61 07 81 09)
e-mail: jean-pierre.rocafort at meteo.fr

Serveur WWW METEO-France: http://www.meteo.fr
_______________________________________________



More information about the Blml mailing list