[blml] 2 hands

[Gampas at aol.com]

The most recent version uses the phrase "demonstrably suggested over  
alternative actions" by the hesitation, or similar. Here it is clear that  partner 
was thinking about bidding something other than Three Spades. That could  have 
been Pass (presumably encouraging as 3C was forcing to 3S), 3H which may or  
may not have been some sort of last train, Double which presumably would have  
been penalties, and the bid he made, Three Spades. If the 2D bid, as stated, is 
 simply a constructive raise to 2S, rather than an unlimited UCB style 3-card 
 raise, then I think Pass is a logical alternative (partner could have say 
xxx  Kxx KQx 10xxx when game is poor). But the slow 3S does not suggest one  
particular hand type over another, therefore I would allow the 4S bid as it is  
not "demonstrably" suggested over the LA which is Pass.
 
I agree with _grabiner at alum_ (mailto:grabiner at alum) ... regarding the second 
hand. Any  method of continuing the auction is permitted, but agreements over 
insufficient  bids are not. So they can conclude whatever they think is most 
likely. I wonder  if anyone knows what happens if a bid is inadvertent (for 
example a mechanical  error) and insufficient but condoned by the next hand 
passing. Does law 25A or  law 27A take precedence? Logic suggests the former, as a 
pair may prefer to have  a normal auction rather than one with an extra round 
of bidding space where they  are guessing what the meanings of bids are. What 
would 1NT - 1C - 1NT mean, for  example!?
 
Paul L




   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070903/97189e9a/attachment.htm