[blml] player overruling the TD ?

[Sven Pran]

> From: blml-bounces at amsterdamned.org [mailto:blml-bounces at amsterdamned.org]
...............
> Is there such a thing as asking the TD to overrule himself? 
> This is a case that appeared in Belgian mixed teams last week:
> 

What level is that: National, regional, local? If it is anything but local I
am astonished by your story.

> 
> You hold Qxxx - AKx - 10x - Q9xx. Well, that's the kind of hands 11-14 NT
> are made for, so you merrily open one. LHO doubles. Partner passes (shows
> values and suggests beginning to double). RHO bids 1S. No Sir ! says
> partner.
> RHO reaches for something else in his BB (presumably 2S) but you stop him
> in his tracks, and call for the TD.
> 
> The idea is to accept 1S. Then you'll bid 1NT, which you hope partner will
> understand as denying interest in going any higher, showing a spade
> stopper, but by the same time not goodish spades, as you didn't attempt to
> have a whack at 2S. Right ?
> 
> Not for the TD, alas, who checks that 2S wouldn't have been artificial,
> then explains that 'if you bid 2S etc.' and 'if you bid something else,
> including pass, etc.', but completely forgets to mention the possibility
> of
> accpeting the IB. Upon which RHO bids 2S.
> 
> What are your rights here ?
> 
> a) asking the TD to reconsider his reading, or to read the applicable law
> rather than citing it ? And what if RHO has bid before you can utter any
> word, as was the case ?
> 
> b) directly tell you'll request use of L82 if needed ? Sort of keeping
> your
> rights ?
> 
> c) are you allowed to mention the IB, call the TD, then accept it (rather
> than accepting it altogether), so that partner knows you know what you're
> doing ?

Your formal rights are:

1: Request law information from the Director until you feel sure you have
been given the complete information relevant to the case.

2: Appeal the Director's ruling on the ground that he has used the law(s)
incorrectly (or that he has made an incorrect judgment - not applicable in
this case).

3: A further appeal to the national authority if you feel that your appeal
has been handled unsatisfactorily.

> In practice, I did neither, afraid that my reaction could give out UI, or
> any kind of information to opponents.
> Partner reopened with 2NT (take-out), which I passed.
> Herman and collegues were spared a headache, as the defense was soft
> enough
> to allow that contract to be made, so L82 remained in its bed.

Good for the Director!

There seems to be far too much worrying about not giving away UI when
exercising ones rights. Exercising rights (within reason) always has
priority over not creating UI. UI is mainly of concern for the receiving
party not for the sending party.

In practice I would say that you should (in a polite manner) have called the
Director's attention to the part of the laws that he apparently overlooked
and have him let you accept the insufficient bid as you wanted.

Note: Your reason for accepting the IB and your stated purpose for you
bidding 1NT a second time is UI to your partner and particularly should not
be evident to him/her from agreements between you. You will bid 1NT at your
own risk that partner will interpret you as desired and your partner should
be in a position to figure out your intention from "general knowledge and
experience".

Regards Sven