[SimonFa]

EBU. Local club night but with some serious players, including in this case our Opps.

LHO deals, they Red we White:

(1D) 1S (2H) 3S*
(P) 4S All pass

After my 3S bid LHO asked partner what it meant and partner explained it was a stronger bid than 4S.

At the end of the auction I explained that in this competitive situation it was preemptive and showed 4 spades only with no description of strength.

LHO, also an EBU Director, said he wasn't happy and wanted to reserve his rights. I wasn't happy with this state of affairs as I don't like this idea of a possible challenge hanging over me (well partner) but more because I thought that if there was a problem they had a right to withdraw their last pass and make a bid and not get in to a bun fight over damage.

I called for the Director who, after the explanation of the problem, asked me:

What does our card say? Nothing specific on this auction but its in our notes.

I can't remember his exact words but he then said that was the end of the issue and we should carry on.


1. Was he right? Both LHO and I thought he should be given the opportunity to withdraw his last bid.

2. Was my action to call the Director OK or should I have waited until the end of the hand and see what Opps had to say?

Thanks in advance,
Simon


PS Director is a playing Director if that makes any difference.

[blackshoe]

"Reserving rights" is an action specific to Law 16, which deals with UI. It has nothing to do with MI. If your opponents want their rights wrt MI, they need to call the director at the end of the auction. Since he was there, and both you and your opponent felt there was an MI issue, one of you should have asked him about it. Perhaps "what about Law 21?" or "what about the MI?"

[Rossoneri]

Off the top of my head, I do think your LHO was allowed to take back his final pass.

Edit: Yes, it seems like Law 21 says this is allowed!

This post has been edited by Rossoneri: 2011-November-24, 19:38

[aguahombre]

Does EBU cover this differently? From over here in the colonies it looks as if you and your LHO were right and the Director was preoccupied. In other words, ditto to the above posts.

P.S., was partner thinking about some other auction or some other planet which uses pinocle decks? Did West think maybe the original overcall was on a yarboro?

[axman]

blackshoe, on 2011-November-24, 17:56, said:

"Reserving rights" is an action specific to Law 16, which deals with UI. It has nothing to do with MI. If your opponents want their rights wrt MI, they need to call the director at the end of the auction. Since he was there, and both you and your pop felt there was an MI issue, one of you should have asked him about it. Perhaps "what about Law 21?" or "what about the MI?"

My understanding of events suggests that 4th hand should call the TD to say that he believes 2nd

hand misinformed the opponents. The TD should require that the correction be made; and based on the fact that where 3S actually does not promise any honors while the explanation was that it did, the TD should rule MI.

note- that an explanation of better than 4S [which for a different partnership might have been true but was false for this one] is still inadequate without knowing what 4S promises

And then ascertain from the opponents if they would do something different [particularly after 3S [privately]. Then cancel the last pass giving dealer the opportunity of doing something different than pass.

[bluejak]

Should you have called the TD? Yes, certainly. When there is a potential MI case the TD should always be called - basic EBU advice. Furthermore, when a player misexplains the TD should be called before the correction, though, to be fair, rarely is. Furthermore, attention has been drawn to an irregularity, and the TD should be called. Reserving of rights is a means of establishing facts when UI has possibly been transmitted - hardly the point here.

Did the TD investigate adequately? No, I do not think so.

Should LHO have had his last pass back? Yes, I believe so.

[RMB1]

SimonFa, on 2011-November-24, 17:30, said:

(1D) 1S (2H) 3S*
(P) 4S All pass

After my 3S bid LHO asked partner what it meant and partner explained it was a stronger bid than 4S.

I think it is ridiculous for someone to claim to be misinformed by this explanation. It clearly applies to a different auction (e.g. one in which the overcalling side were already forced to game). LHO should either have ignored the explanation or called the TD and sought clarification at the time. Claiming that your were misinformed afterwards does the game and atmosphere of club no favours whatsoever.

[SimonFa]

Thanks for the prompt replies and good to know that I have learned something in the past year or so.

I have read the rule books but being a beginner find them almost unintelligible and I have found these forums a great source of understanding, so a general thanks as well.

Simon

[Mbodell]

Yeah, as others mentioned the important point isn't just that LHO should get his pass back, it is that both LHO and RHO should have an opportunity, away from the table with the director, to say if they would have bid differently over the 3S (for LHO) or over the 4S (for RHO) given the correct information. The TD should find this out now, not after they know all 52 cards. In this situation, probably nothing would happen here. And LHO should get his final pass back (again likely nothing would happen here). Finally, in theory, you have UI on your pass of 4S but likely there are no LA for your hand other than pass.

[Zelandakh]

RMB1, on 2011-November-25, 02:01, said:

I think it is ridiculous for someone to claim to be misinformed by this explanation. It clearly applies to a different auction (e.g. one in which the overcalling side were already forced to game). LHO should either have ignored the explanation or called the TD and sought clarification at the time. Claiming that your were misinformed afterwards does the game and atmosphere of club no favours whatsoever.

Do you not know anyone that still plays 3S here as a limit raise and 4S as preemptive? If LHO had a weak hand with some hearts they might just decide to bid 4H over an invitational 3S to suggest going to 5H over their 4S but not over a weak 3S in case partner tries to double their 4S. OK this is not especially likely, but it is not impossible. Saying that the explanation "clearly applies to a different auction" though is very much an overbid.

@Simon, Club players are rather fond of "reserving their rights" because the vast majority have no idea what it means. If someone does so you can try asking what rights they are reserving - they will probably say in case of damage and you can answer that this is not a right they can reserve. If they say that you have UI for your final pass then you can simply agree (you almost certainly had no LA). Or you can simply ignore it. As an aside, you could legitimately reserve your rights on this hand too as LHOs comment could be construed to suggest they might have considered bidding over 3S which would suggest some heart values, and therefore a heart lead. As others have said, the Director could have done better. On your specific questions:-

1. The Director was wrong and LHO should have had his final pass back.
2. Not only was your action to call the Director OK the laws say that you must do this. The vast majority do not call the Director for this though.

[campboy]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-25, 04:20, said:

Do you not know anyone that still plays 3S here as a limit raise and 4S as preemptive?

I don't think that is the agreement described by "stronger than 4♠"; that would be "invitational" or similar. "Stronger than 4♠" suggests that you can't play below 4♠; why else would you compare it to 4♠ in the first place?

[blackshoe]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-25, 04:20, said:

2. Not only was your action to call the Director OK the laws say that you must do this. The vast majority do not call the Director for this though.

Careful, there! If the WBFLC get wind of this, they'll change "must" to "should".

[mycroft]

The reason you need the TD is that it's not just the last pass - it's the passes over 3♠ and 4♠ as well that need to be addressed - and since it's too late to change those, it's the TDs job to determine whether there was damage. Mbodell's discussion is SOP in the ACBL, but I believe frowned upon in the EBU.

This is a case where in the ACBL, I would wonder about the dreaded caveat in the Alert Procedure: "Note also that an opponent who actually knows or suspects what is happening, even though not properly informed, may not be entitled to redress if he or she chooses to proceed without clarifying the situation." In the EBU, I believe there is a similar phrasing, which is what Robin is basing his argument off.

But all of that is the TDs job to work out. If she's a playing TD, well, then she's got that much less time to play her hand. She may say "I'll look at it later" - either when she has time, or after she's played it - but she still needs to do the groundwork.

I don't know which one applies to this case - I would have to be there.

[barmar]

campboy, on 2011-November-25, 07:27, said:

I don't think that is the agreement described by "stronger than 4♠"; that would be "invitational" or similar. "Stronger than 4♠" suggests that you can't play below 4♠; why else would you compare it to 4♠ in the first place?

The way I think they may have intended it is as "less preemptive than 4♠". Pedrhaps they bid 4 with 5 cards and a very weak hand, they bid only 3 with 4 cards and a moderately weak hand. Or maybe 3♠ is allowed to have some side strength, so partner shouldn't give up on looking for slam if he has a rock-crusher, while 4♠ is really discouraging.

[SimonFa]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-25, 04:20, said:

@Simon, Club players are rather fond of "reserving their rights" because the vast majority have no idea what it means. If someone does so you can try asking what rights they are reserving - they will probably say in case of damage and you can answer that this is not a right they can reserve.

I think I need to know more about those because its usually the better players who do it and most people expect them to know what they are doing. I'll go an have a look at the EBU website.

As for partner's comment about 3S being stronger than 4S, we play this in an uncontested auction, and shows 4-card support and 11/12 HCP, with 3-card support and 10/11HCP we use a delayed raise to 3S. In competitive auction we just jump to the level of fit. Basic stuff, but we are in the B/I category.

Once again, thanks for the comments,

Simon

[campboy]

The point of reserving one's rights is as follows. Suppose there has been a hesitation by opposition. It is not an infraction, so there is no reason to call the TD now. We shall only call the TD at the end of the hand, and only if it looks like there has been an infraction in the subsequent bidding. Of course we always have the "right" to call the TD at the end of the hand. What we want to "reserve" is the ability to call him later without jeopardising our chances of establishing the facts. If there is going to be any dispute about whether there was a hesitation we should call the TD now.

I strongly prefer "do you agree there was a hesitation" to "I'd like to reserve my rights".

[blackshoe]

So do I. Of course, the usual reaction is "no", and the opponents do not call the TD as they are required to do. So we have to call him.

[aguahombre]

campboy, on 2011-November-26, 09:09, said:

I strongly prefer "do you agree there was a hesitation" to "I'd like to reserve my rights".

Yes, sounds like a less confrontational way of putting it.

blackshoe, on 2011-November-26, 09:51, said:

So do I. Of course, the usual reaction is "no", and the opponents do not call the TD as they are required to do. So we have to call him.

If the reaction is "no", why would the side which claims there was no hesitation be required to call the Director? They are claiming no no B.I.T occurred.

"Director, please."
"How may I be of service?"
"We didn't hesititate (until now) in the auction."
"And, how may I be of service?"

[blackshoe]

aguahombre, on 2011-November-26, 10:06, said:

Yes, sounds like a less confrontational way of putting it.

If the reaction is "no", why would the side which claims there was no hesitation be required to call the Director? They are claiming no no B.I.T occurred.

"Director, please."
"How may I be of service?"
"We didn't hesititate (until now) in the auction."
"And, how may I be of service?"

Quote

Law 16B2: When a player considers that an opponent has made such information available and that damage could well result, he may announce, unless prohibited by the Regulating Authority (which may require that the Director be called), that he reserves the right to summon the Director later. The opponents should summon the Director immediately if they dispute the fact that unauthorized information might have been conveyed.

[aguahombre]

It would seem to preclude another civilized possibility among pairs who respect each other.

"Do you agree there was a hesitation?"
"NO." (and maybe even joined in by the others at the table)
"O.K., I accept that."

No one has "reserved" anything, they asked a question and got an answer.