[jmcw]

---

I sat SOUTH in a recent ACBL online game, when this deal came up.

After the play of the hand I informed the director that I found the East/West bidding quite surprising NO ALERTS.
I suggested perhaps they had both psyched!. It seems to me East has nowhere near the values for his bid. West, on the other hand has, IMO, made a gross underbid of 3♥(I would be making a slam try).

The director was quick to inform me that there is no law against bad bidding....end of story.

I'm quite certain the ACBL has, infact, no laws against bad bidding, but they do have laws requiring players to ALERT Negative Free Bids!, if that was infact what was going on here.
I really don't know what East/West were doing, but I think the director was dead wrong.

Surely, East/West should be informed their bids are, at best, highly unusual! and may be viewed by some as suggestive of a private agreement or worse!

Now to my question, What should a director have done?

[wank]

firstly most online players are beyond clueless, so there's no reason to assume they knew what their bids are supposed to mean.

but let's assume you're right and the opps are playing negative free bids. if that's alertable in america (i've no idea, not being american), then the opps failed to alert, effectively misinforming you, but you weren't damaged so no adjustment to the score. if the opps make a habit of failing to alert unusual agreements [not unusual bids] the director might give them a stern talking to or possibly even issue them with a procedural penalty [fine them a a percentage]

[bluejak]

Having played a lot in clubs over the years - and much online bridge is worse than club bridge - it may be true that the E/W bidding is suspicious. But it is far more likely that it is merely incompetent.

What should the TD have done? Ruled on the facts presented, which he did. Sure, it would be nice to investigate more fully, but that is far more difficult online.

[barmar]

I also ran into a questionable auction in the ACBL online IMP game Saturday night.

---

East made a very off-shape takeout double, and then West left the redouble in when he had a 5-card major he could bid. My partner went down 1, and we felt really bad because it seems like West fielded the psyche or there was a wire. I reported it to the TD, who said they noted it, but couldn't take any action based on a single case.

Although I found 4 other Easts in the results who also doubled. In one case South kept silent(!) and let West play 2♥ unmolested, down 2. At most of the other tables South bid 2♥ himself, and they generally ended up too high in NT. So maybe the double was a good tactical bid. There were also a few Easts who made an aggressive NT overcall.

[bluejak]

Quote

... it seems like West fielded the psyche or there was a wire.

Not to me. Having played against these people for years, East has 12 or more points, no five card suit, so he "has to double".

West was all prepared to bid 2♥ grumpily and unhappily with his "terrible" hand [yes, I know it's not, but most club players think anything less than eight points is a disaster] but luckily there was a redouble and he did not need to.

How about East? Well, he hasn't got a suit [yes, we know he has, but he does not think of Txxx as a suit] and he has a few spades. So he passes.

Perfectly normal bridge at this level.

Yes, I know it was different when we played each other!

[peachy]

Negative free bids are alertable in ACBL games. Ignorance (or, more likely, inexperience) about the alert regulation is not an excuse for lack of alert. Other than "no adjustment" since there was no damage, TD should have educated East about his self-alerting responsibility.