[blml] MI ur deviation from system?

[Matthias Berghaus]

Hi all,

the following happened in league play (second dividion from the bottom). 
Matches at that level are usually at the home of one of the players, so 
most of the time no TD is on hand. The "cases" are sent by email or 
letter to the TD responsible for the district.

W/none

             KQ
             64
             J10652
             K1082
J10                    975432
AQJ1087                K92
A7                     Q9
A92                    83
             A86
             53
             K864
             QJ64


The bidding:

  W     N     E      S
 1D     p    1S      p
 3H     p    4H     all pass

E/W play a variation of Blue Club with canape and a wide-range NT. The 
CC says 12-17 NT with all responses and range scheme listed. According 
to CC they cannot show the 12 point type. Minimum length for 1D 3 cards, 
11-16 (CC). 2C promises 5, but 3325 is opened 1NT (this is where the 12 
pointers come in...) The sequence above guarantees 6 hearts (and was 
explained as such).

The play:

Diamond Jack, 9 (!), 4 (even number), Ace
Spade Jack, Queen, 2, 8 (odd number)
Diamond to the King
Club Queen, Ace, 2,3
Heart 7 to the 9
Low Spade to the 10 and King

North now played a diamond, giving W the contract. Unsurprisingly N was 
not amused. He argued: With South having an even number of diamonds and 
W promising at least 3 declarer has to be 2641. The only chance to set 
the contract is to play a diamond now, which has to be ruffed high. Now 
the spades are dead. Any other return will not be good enough.

Obviously N is good enough to reconstruct declarer`s hand from the 
bidding and play, but not good enough to realise that this would leave 
declarer with A876 in diamonds, with which he would surely have covered 
the lead, drawing trumps and simply conceding a diamond. Alternatively 
he could have ruffed 2 diamonds high in dummy, again guaranteeing the 
contract.


No statement from W.

It seems to me that the E/W system has a hole, but that hole has nothing 
to do with this hand. Surely 1H with a 3H rebid is the normal way to bid 
this hand. The interesting hands are the 3325 types, and that is covered 
by 1NT. As written above there is a slight difficulty with this, all 
responses to a strength ask showing 13+. It looks like W deviated from 
the system (for whatever reason). On the other hand the correct minimum 
length for 1D should probably be "2", but never with a 3H rebid, which 
should show something like the hand N played for.

Is this

a) MI
b) allowed deviation from system

Would it make a difference if W had a history of "creative" bidding, for 
example many deviations (no real psyches, just deviations), but with no 
clear pattern?

E/W are a regular partnership.

Comments please.

Best regards
Matthias