[blml] San Diego Lightfoot Sue [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Gampas at aol.com]

In a message dated 05/09/2007 23:13:00 GMT  Standard Time, 
richard.hills at immi.gov.au writes:
Spingold Teams, San Diego  1994

Dlr: North
Vul:  None

\         JT93
\       AQJ98
\     98
\    62
---      \               AQ4
KT3        \             752
QT765        \           32
T9753          \         AKQJ8
K87652\
64       \
AKJ4       \
4            \

WEST      NORTH      EAST       SOUTH
---        Pass      1NT        2C(1)
2D(2)     Pass       2H         2S
3C         4S         5C         Pass
Pass      Dble       Pass      Pass
Pass

(1) Alerted on both sides  of the screen
as a one-suited hand
(2) Alerted by *East* as a transfer  to
hearts

Result: North led the HA.  Five clubs
went down one  trick, +100 to North-South.  

It would appear to me that North was given the correct explanation and  would 
therefore lead the AH all the time (his partner has 0 or 1 heart). The  
correct decision seems to be the table result of +100 to East-West and this is  
just bad luck for North-South. The fact that East bid 2H over 2D suggests to  
West that there is a misunderstanding, as 2D would be non-forcing in normal  
methods over Cappelletti. If East had passed, West would still have bid 3C over  
2S, shaping out, so no problem there. West has volunteered information to  
South (they may, for example, have once played system off over Capp but now play  
system on) which shows active ethics.
 
My guess is that the AC wrongly assigned a score of +500 to North-South (a  
diamond lead and South getting a heart ruff). Or maybe 5S doubled for +650 to  
North-South. The only justification for anything other than the correct ruling 
 IMHO would seem to be if the AC had evidence that the system  notes were 
typeset after the original ruling!
 
Paul