[blml] Opinion needed on score adjustment.

[Laval Dubreuil]

Tony writes:

I found the following case of misinformation difficult.

Nil Vul, Dealer North

                             Q 9 5 3
                             K
                             Q J 10 4 3
                             8 6 3

       K 10                                          J 7 6 4 2
       A 9 6 3                                      J 8 5
       A 9 8 6 2                                   K 5
       A J                                            Q 9 2

                             A 8
                             Q 10 7 4 2
                             7
                             K 10 7 5 4


South opened 2H, to show that suit and another, not
alerted  (OK for a weak 6 card suit in Oz).  West then bid 3NT
(2NT would have shown the minors, and double was ruled out
because West was afraid of the spade response).  North had
forgotten the system, and 3NT went down three (bottom).

No-one else in the club played the hand with an opening 2H
bid, so it was difficult to decide what might have occurred in the
bidding, and perhaps the subsequent play with correct information.

I finally decided that a plausible scenario was for West to pass
and await the further auction, leaving 2H by South as the final
contract.  This should go 2 off, for quite a good EW score.
_________________________________________________________________

There was misinformation: "an other suit" was not alerted.
There was a bad score for E-W.
But does this bad score come from the MI?

Not so evident. What W would have bid without the MI ?
Is it then more evident not to bid 3NT than on a "normal" 2H
opening ? The other suit is likely to be Spade.

The real problem is the E-W system: using 2NT as minors on
a weak opening, instead of a standard 15-18 balanced hand.

My first reaction would be: the score stand.

Laval Du Breuil
Quebec City