[Antrax]

I witnessed this auction:
1NT-2♥
2♠-3♥
4♠-4NT

2♥ was announced as a transfer. We inquired about 4NT and the opponent informed us that "it can't be slam interest, because partner is expected to just bid how many aces she has at the 5-level. So, I have no idea what it is, probably natural". Dummy had AKQxx of hearts and a singleton spade, she forgot their agreement.
Did any foul play occur? Does it matter if 4NT only goes down on a spade lead?
(The case is purely academic, if it's relevant. We did see this auction but 4N was down quite a few while 4H easily makes)

[blackshoe]

How many is 4♠ down?

The question, basically, is "why did responder bid 4NT?" I guess we have to ask him.

[Antrax]

I'm guessing by that point it was obvious they're having a misunderstanding and 4NT is more likely to make than 5♥?

[WellSpyder]

 blackshoe, on 2012-February-14, 01:09, said:

The question, basically, is "why did responder bid 4NT?" I guess we have to ask him.

If partner opens 1NT and you have a singleton spade, I guess you probably don't expect 4♠ to be the best spot....

[wank]

you don't need UI to know that when p opens 1nt then keeps on bidding spades when you bid hearts, that he's taken it as a transfer. admittedly, putting myself in the place of someone who's capable of forgetting transfers over 1nt is a little trick.

west can pass 4nt unless he has some UI - east's looking visibly sick when 4♠ appeared or something

[bluejak]

One of the rules of this forum is that OPs should state the jurisdiction. This affects the type of bidding, what is normal, certain interpretations, and a lot of regulations. Please would people do so.

Nearly everyone in the world would take 4NT as some form of Blackwood. If opener did not do so there are two likely possibilities.

• UI: responder indicated by body language, comments or in other ways how unhappy he was with the way the auction progressed.
  
• A CPU, ie opener has experience of responder getting transfers wrong before and is using this CPU in defiance of Law 40.

Now the point about the jurisdiction is that in the latter case in England or Wales it is easy: you rule a Red Misbid and score the board as Ave-/Ave+ unless the non-offenders got better than 60% on it.

In other jurisdictions this breach of Law seems to be generally ignored. Humph.



Incidentally, I know there is a large group of poor players who pass after

---

routinely because they have no conept of showing two suits via a transfer. But once this West bid 4♠ that possibility disappeared.

[iviehoff]

 bluejak, on 2012-February-14, 09:29, said:

Nearly everyone in the world would take 4NT as some form of Blackwood.

The player is sure he isn't playing Blackwood, because he is sure he is playing some fancy Blackwood replacement convention in this auction, of the kind best not employed by anyone a partnership having a member capable of forgetting a basic transfer over 1N. Whilst I am surprised that 4N is not part of the step system in such a convention, nor has been assigned a specific meaning, there is a known population of players at this level who like employing pet gadgets of dubious construction. So I think, in the presence of a confident assertion that in fact they don't play Blackwood on this auction, the director needs to do a bit more due diligence on this than simply disbelieve them on the grounds that "nearly everyone" plays something else.

[Antrax]

Israel, don't know which jurisdiction applies and not well-versed enough in the laws to answer any questions, sorry. I'm more interested in the spirit of things, since things like UI seem to be common across jurisdictions.

[bluejak]

 iviehoff, on 2012-February-14, 10:15, said:

The player is sure he isn't playing Blackwood, because he is sure he is playing some fancy Blackwood replacement convention in this auction, of the kind best not employed by anyone a partnership having a member capable of forgetting a basic transfer over 1N. Whilst I am surprised that 4N is not part of the step system in such a convention, nor has been assigned a specific meaning, there is a known population of players at this level who like employing pet gadgets of dubious construction. So I think, in the presence of a confident assertion that in fact they don't play Blackwood on this auction, the director needs to do a bit more due diligence on this than simply disbelieve them on the grounds that "nearly everyone" plays something else.

Certainly if I was there I would be asking him what he is talking about. But we have to discuss matters here without being able to quiz the players.

My experience of such strange remarks is that they are often irrelevant and come from general confusion.

 Antrax, on 2012-February-14, 10:28, said:

Israel, don't know which jurisdiction applies and not well-versed enough in the laws to answer any questions, sorry. I'm more interested in the spirit of things, since things like UI seem to be common across jurisdictions.

Unfortunately what you posted is not. All you have to do is to say it is Israel: that is the jurisdiction.

[barmar]

 wank, on 2012-February-14, 06:15, said:

you don't need UI to know that when p opens 1nt then keeps on bidding spades when you bid hearts, that he's taken it as a transfer. admittedly, putting myself in the place of someone who's capable of forgetting transfers over 1nt is a little trick.

I can just barely remember what it was like before I learned transfers. 2♥ would be a shut-out bid, so opener rebidding freely is an impossible auction.

However, it seems like responder may have been too strong for a shut-out bid. Were his heart honors the only strength in his hand? I think most would still consider this enough for a forcing 3♥ bid, although someone who can forget transfers may also not be very good at hand evaluation.

If it was intended as shut-out, then opener rebidding implies that the auction has gone off the rails. However, partner could be confused in various ways: did he think 2♥ was constructive rather than shut-out, or did he think it was a transfer? The UI resolves this question.

But does it suggest one LA over another? It doesn't seem like passing 2♠ is a LA in any case. Are there any other LAs? It's hard to know without seeing the full hand, although with 1=5 majors there must be a 4-card minor. Does the UI suggest rebidding your original suit over showing a second suit? If he's making a game try of some sort, and you have this max for the shut-out, it sure seems like you should do something more than just show the same thing you showed the first time.