[blml] Profit from irregularites

[Brian Meadows]

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:22:28 +0000, Nigel Guthrie wrote:

>>   
>[nige1]
>Well David is one of many posters, here and on RGB, who agree with the 
>author of the original article that such agreements are legal and 
>useful. I'm unsure whether any individual correspondent is brave enough 
>to admit that he, himself, employs them; but the publicity ensures that 
>they will become increasingly popular in any jurisdiction under which 
>they are not explicitly banned.
>
I have a vague recollection of this having been raised before,
but I can't remember the resolution, if any. Take an example of a
Precision pair using the various asking bids, and an opponent
decides to interfere, but does so with an insufficient bid. For
example, say the bidding goes (opponents silent)

1C (16+)   1H (positive in hearts)
2H (asks about responder's hearts)

Responder actually has a 6+ card suit with two top honours, and
would normally bid 3H (5 steps) to show that, but now RHO makes
an insufficient overcall of 1S. 

Assuming that the Precision pair are playing pass = 1st step,
double = 2nd step over interference, are they allowed to accept
the insufficient bid and bid 2D as the 5th step to show the 6+
and two honours? 

Furthermore, are they allowed to have agreed in advance that they
will ALWAYS accept an insufficient bid under these circumstances,
and just take advantage of the extra bidding room? 

I suppose there's also one final question. If this continuation
of steps from the insufficient bid is allowed, are you also able
to add in steps which involve not accepting the insufficient bid,
e.g. on the auction 1C-(p)-1H-(p)-2H-(1S)

pass = 1st step
double = 2 steps
1NT = 3 steps
2C = 4 steps
2D = 5 steps
2H = 6 steps
2S = 7 steps
reject the IB, then pass if corrected to 2S = 8 steps
reject the IB, then double if corrected to 2S = 9 steps


Brian.