[blml] Hawaii Appeal 4

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adam Beneschan" <adam at irvine.com>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Cc: <adam at irvine.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Hawaii Appeal 4


>
> Harald wrote:
>
>> On 01/03/07, Linda Trent <ljtrent at adelphia.net> wrote:
>> > This is getting scary.
>> > So, what's up with this?
>>
>> Please explain why you think this is scary.
>> I fail to see anything extraordinary in this case.
>> The TD and AC got this one right IMO.

I have a 9 loser 3433 H. raise.  Jeez, I know the yanks need a rock to open 
but it's gettin' feckin' ridiculous. 2N was a serious overbid even if you 
play 3+ raises. I'd be looking for the 2h bid in my box facing the game try. 
3D is verging on the bizarre - a return game try.?  I wanna play money 
against people who bid like this.      cheers john

>
> My first impression was that East barely has a limit raise--11 HCP and
> flat as a pancake.  So doing anything more than he already has seems
> over-aggressive, so I probably wouldn't have ruled 4H to be a logical
> alternative.  But Marv's post convinced me that it's at least
> plausible.  The hand does have plenty of intermediates.
>
> Nevertheless, I can understand how someone looking at East's flat
> minimum might think that the AC/TD overreached to try to find a way to
> punish E-W for their infraction.  But IMHO this one is borderline
> between "LA" and "not LA", so I can accept the AC going either way on
> this.
>
>                                -- Adam
>
>
>
>
>> -- 
>> Kind regards,
>> Harald Skjæran
>>
>> >
>> > APPEAL CASE 4
>> > Event: Blue Ribbon Pairs
>> > Session: First qualifying session, Nov. 21
>> >                           Dick Bruno
>> > Board 8                S Q 8 4 3
>> > Vul: None              H 2
>> > Dlr: West              D K Q 8 4
>> >                           C A K 8 5
>> > Barie Wall                           Ray Miller
>> > S A J 7 2                            S K 9 5
>> > H K Q 10 5 4                         H J 9 7 3
>> > D 6 2                                D A J 3
>> > C J 7                                C Q 10 9
>> >                       Peggy Kaplan
>> >                       S 10 6
>> >                       H A 8 6
>> >                       D 10 9 7 5
>> >                       C 8 4 3 2
>> > West     North     East     South
>> > 1H       Dbl        2NT (1)  Pass
>> > 3C       Pass      3H       All Pass
>> >
>> > (1) Explained as a relay to 3C.
>> >
>> > Facts: The result at the table was 3H by West
>> > making three after the opening lead of the CA. EW
>> > play 2NT as a limit raise or better in hearts.
>> > West confused two auctions and provided a
>> > mistaken explanation of 2NT without having been
>> > asked. The partnership agreement of the 3C bid is
>> > that it is a long-suit game try.
>> >
>> > Director's Ruling: The director found that
>> > there was unauthorized information (UI) arising
>> > from the incorrect explanation of the agreement.
>> > After consulting several players, the director
>> > decided that bidding 4H was a less successful
>> > logical alternative (LA) for East, rather than
>> > bidding 3H, which was demonstrably suggested by
>> > the UI. In accordance with Laws 16 A and 12 C.2,
>> > an adjustment was made to 4H by East, down one
>> > for a score of E-W minus 50.
>> >
>> > The Appeal: East said that West opened all 11
>> > point hands. 3C suggested 12 to 13 high-card
>> > points, since with more, West would have accepted
>> > the limit raise. South suggested that East's club
>> > fillers made his hand worth a raise to 4H.
>> >
>> > The Decision: The committee determined that
>> > West?s misexplanation constituted UI under Law
>> > 16. Since East possessed information suggesting
>> > that West might not have a game invitation, 3H, as
>> > opposed to 4H, was made more attractive given
>> > the form of scoring. So the questions to be
>> > answered at this point were whether there was a
>> > logical alternative to bidding 3H and whether there
>> > were any other calls, such as 3D or 3NT, to
>> > consider as LAs. The panel considered a minimum
>> > hand like: S Ax H KQ10xx D xx C Kxxx
>> > where the game would depend on a club finesse.
>> > The panel also noted that changing one of the
>> > kings to an ace or adding the  DJ would make 4H
>> > an excellent game. Therefore, the committee
>> > deemed 4H a LA to 3H.
>> >
>> > The Committee: Jeff Goldsmith (chair),
>> > Darwin Afdahl, Joann Sprung, Peggy Sutherlin
>> > and Jim Thurtell.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > blml mailing list
>> > blml at amsterdamned.org
>> > http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blml mailing list
>> blml at amsterdamned.org
>> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>>
>>
>
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>