[blml] Trains Fur [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Harald Skjæran a écrit :
> On 28/05/2008, richard.hills at immi.gov.au <richard.hills at immi.gov.au> wrote:
>   
>> Knockout teams, Dlr: North, Vul: North-South
>>
>> The bidding has gone:
>>
>> WEST      NORTH     EAST      SOUTH
>> ---       1C (1)    4D (2)    4S
>> 5D        X         ?
>>
>> (1) Forcing, not necessarily strong
>> (2) Transfer preempt to hearts
>>
>> You, East, hold:
>>
>> 6
>> AJT87654
>> 653
>> 5
>>
>> What call do you make?
>>     
>
> Pass. 5D is natural, normally a save. It can't be lead-directing,
> since partner is on lead himself. We've been doubled, so partner is
> still there.
>
>   
>> What other calls do you consider making?
>>     
>
> Absolutely none.
> If someone screwed up here (supposedly partner forgot the transfer
> part of the preempt), I've got UI constraints.
>   
AG : you should assume nobody srewed it up. And ask yourself what 5D 
means in that case. Perhaps you would say it's natural, but some would 
say it's fit-showing.

Never assume a screw-up without due enquiry.
We once had the following auction :
4C      4H
5C      5D
6H
4C was a transfer to hearts.
RHO, a well-known TD, made comments about ethics, then doubled and added 
"I won't call the TD, the score will be enough of a penalty".

We made seven. 5C wasn't an attempt to correct a screw-up. My partner 
had :  void - AKQJxxxx - x - AQ10x.
RHO was right in a way : the score was the right punishment.

The most important thing, here, is to remember that "peers" also means 
"players who use the same conventions". If the pair in question are 
diehard Robsonians, 5H is automatic, for the reasons presented in my 
preceding post.
This proves one thing : questions of the form "what do you bid and why" 
can't be answered without knowing the full set of agreements.

Best regards

    Alain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20080528/3dea49f2/attachment.htm