[blml] Your call

[Jean-Jacques Lafay]

Karel a écrit :
> The only evidence we have which is concrete is the subsequent poll.  Over
> 80% of the pollee's would have bid on to at least the 5 level.  So 80+% of
> the IBer's partners peers on a normal auction felt this hand worth at least
> a slam try.  And yet the OS , given unusual (but apparently "smoothly"
> covered) circumstances, decided to go low and yet this all seems perfectly
> normal ?  How did Hamlet put it ... "there is something rotten in the state
> of Denmark ...".

I'm not sure I understood : what was the question asked in the poll ? If 
it was the question you asked at the beginning of the thread, it might 
be interesting, but is not related to the case at hand : partner *did* 
bid 2H, then 3H as a correction, which is AI, *not* merely 3H, this is 
not any more a normal auction, and we cannot pretend it is. At least 
when it comes as a question to blml, there is really no additional UI (I 
agree there might very well be some at the table, for instance making it 
clear whether 2H was intended as an opening bid or as an overcall of a 
1S opening), but all AI should be available !

As I said, I would bid 6NT over 3H, but probably not over 2H corrected 
to 3H. And anyway the normal proceeding is first to establish if there 
was UI, *then* if there was LA, not to find that a decision was quite 
unusual, and concluding that it should have been triggered by some kind 
of UI...

Jean-Jacques.
--