[blml] L9A vs L73B1

[Konrad Ciborowski]

> East (dealer) opens 1C, not alerted. This may be a doubleton in a
> 5crd-major system and is alertable in the NL. Against this opening, NS
> play an artificial defence, based on transfers.
> 
> South, who knows about the possible doubleton C, holds:
> 
> K9
> 62
> QJ8
> AKQ942
> 
> He would like to bid 1S (=transfer to clubs OR showing diamonds and
> hearts). 
> Over a 'natural' 1C (min. 3crd)  he would have bid 1NT.
> 
> South does not know what will happen: 
> a) If he bids 1S, partner may not alert and jump to 3S. 
> b) If he bids 1NT, partner may alert, explain spades and diamonds OR
> hearts and clubs, and jump to 3H.
> 
> Is south allowed to ask the meaning, or draw attention to the
> alertability of 1C?

NO!!! Emphatically NO!!! That would be like telling partner
"watch out: my next bid is going to be artificial!".
That would be blatant transmission of the UI to partner.

If South _knows_ the meaning of the 1C opening he simply has to
assume that partner knows it, too (in the same fashion
you do when playing with screens). So he should overcall
1S. If partner doesn't alert then South should treat a raise
to 3S as natural from partner's own suit (partner's 
failure to alert 1S is UI to South), raise it to 4S,
go down a million and seek redress from the TD which
he will certainly get. 
South knows that his LHO committed an irregularity by
failing to alert 1C but L9A1 says South may draw attention
to it "Unless prohibited by Law". L73B1 prohibits
drawing attention to the failure alert when doing so would
transmit UI to partner.

Only TD is allowed to give redress for infractions, players
are not allowed to take justice in their own hands
("he committed an infraction so I gotta do the same to save my ass").
We were in this point when we discussed whether players
are allowed to ask additional questions about bids to make
sure partner gets all the inferences. Say your RHO
opens 1C (Polish Club), a system that you are very familiar
with but partner is not. The explanation is "natural or balanced, 
could be strong".  This is a woefully inadequate explanation and you 
know it but you are not allowed to continue investigation along
the lines "So it means he can have a void in clubs, doesn't it?"
or "does this mean that he can have a doubleton in clubs when
weak?" to make sure that partner realizes that 1C is not
natural. You have to assume partner understands all the inferences.
Only when the hand is over are you allowed to call the TD and
ask for redress if you were damaged by the inaccurate explanation.

Even if you are not damaged you may call the TD so that he 
instructs your opponents to alert and/or explain properly.
But you cannot attempt to neutralize their infraction of misexplaining
and misalerting by sending UI yourself. This is a no-no.



-- 
Konrad Ciborowski
Kraków, Poland

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oficjalne konto pocztowe europejskich internautow! 
>>> http://link.interia.pl/f19e8