[blml] Situation normal, all...

[David Burn]

[WS]

At the considerable risk of offending someone I suggest to all participants
in this thread to carefully read Law 27D.  It tells you what to do
subsequent to a 27B1(a) sequence.  Please pay particular attention to the
words ".....In his adjustment he should seek to recover as nearly as
possible the probable outcome of the board HAD THE INSUFFICIENT BID NOT
OCCURRED....." (capitals mine).

[DALB]

Oh, I'm not offended in the least. In the example that I gave [North
responds 1H to 1H with x AK10xxx x AKQxx and is allowed to correct to 2H,
natural and game-forcing] there won't be a problem - North will bid
Blackwood at his next turn and get the same result as if he had bid
Blackwood at his first turn. So far so good, and many people would consider
this a "better" or "more bridge-like" outcome than if North had been forced
to guess how many hearts to bid because any call other than 2H (non-forcing)
would bar South.

But suppose that North has a rather less clear-cut decision to make - say he
has xx KJ10xx Axxx Ax and responds 1H to 1H. With North permitted to bid a
natural and game-forcing 2H, a call that would not normally form part of his
bidding methods unless he is the ghost of Alvin Roth, his partnership
reaches a slam on minimum values. Now the Director must:

ask them how they would have bid the hand if North had realised that his
partner had opened; and

decide whether or not to believe the answer.

This is not good, nor is it "bridge-like".

David Burn
London, England