Auction and Explanations
| 1 1H=5-9
* agreed break in tempo
Play - N/A
6HW NS -980
Tournament Directors Statement of Facts and Ruling:
West's 5C showed 0 or 3 keycards. After East bid 5H, West claimed that she
realised that she had given the incorrect response and so corrected to 6H. EW's
defensive agreements to the 1H opening were such that West had not shown any
values by the 2H call. West claimed that East's decision to bid 4NT opposite a
possibly much weaker hand than she held also encouraged her to bid 6H, once she
had given an incorrect Blackwood response.
Ruled that the break in tempo before East's 5H was unauthorised information to
West. However it was ruled that the 6H bid was not based on this information,
but on authorised information from the auction and on West's previously
incorrect call. Result was allowed to stand.
Reasons for Appeal:
Having already shown a GF with long H allegedly, the hesitation
which was very lengthy, effectively assured West that no 2 key cards could be
By contrast, an in-tempo 5H would have strongly suggested the possibility of
(at least) 2 KC missing.
Having already overbid the hand with 2H there was no excuse, absence the
hesitation, for bidding.
By contrast East should have bid 6H - but then West using her therory could
raise to 7 - one off.
We believe the score should be adjusted to 5H making six. If Law - or if you
want to accept EW's explanation 7H minus 1.
Decision of the Appeals Committee: Subject to
further submissions that director's ruling be upheld.
1. Hesitation did not suggest 6H to be better from alternative bids
2. Confusion caused by opening bid, etc, have perhaps forced
partner to reassess what type of Blackwood was involved and reassed when
partner signed off 5H
3. Standard of players considered - lack of defences and
uncertainty about 2H may have caused the hesitation rather than consideration
of East's 6H.
4. Pass was not considerd superior even without the hesitation
assuming she realised the incorrect BW response