[Bende]

Holding the following hand, partner opens with 1NT (15-17) and RHO bids 2♣ (showing any long suit). (Edited)

---

You bid 2♠ before realizing that 2♠ is not natural but instead showing clubs, since you play system on after interferene with 2♣. Partner makes a slightly delayed alert, explains 2♠ as showing diamonds, and bids 3♦.

I understand that regardless of you realizing that 2♠ was not natural, partner's alert means you are not allowed to wake up. Partner's 3♦ (after you show clubs) is undiscussed, as only 2NT (bad hand for clubs) and 3♣ (good hand for clubs) are defined in the system. After transfer to a minor, a new suit by responder shows shortness. It is not certain what a 3♦ would show if 2♠ was natural (as it would be by agreement if 2♣ had shown hearts and another suit for example), but some sort of game try in spades seems likely, though 3♠ would show that as well.

What is the ethical bid now? Where would you expect to end up?

[lamford]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 04:45, said:

What is the ethical bid now? Where would you expect to end up?

Partner's alert and wrong explanation are irrelevant. You bid as though partner did not alert but still bid 3♦. As you would with screens. Partner's 3♦ can only be a good hand for spades, but the singleton diamond and soft values are bad, so you have a normal 3♠. I don't see another LA.

I expect partner will think this shows longer diamonds and spades, forcing, and bid 3NT or 4♠ over this, and I will pass the latter and correct the former to 4♠ as partner has already "shown" a fit. Other than having a Question of Sport style "what happened next?", I should not be concerned about where I would end up.

[Bende]

lamford, on 2014-March-03, 05:21, said:

I expect partner will think this shows longer diamonds and spades, forcing, and bid 3NT or 4♠ over this

Transfer to a minor followed by a new suit would show shortness, so partner will in that case think you have 1x6x and a game force.

[pran]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 05:54, said:

Transfer to a minor followed by a new suit would show shortness, so partner will in that case think you have 1x6x and a game force.

Well - that depends on agreement (unless it is specific for transfer to a minor followed by a bid in a major suit?).

In my system 1NT - 2H is transfer to spades (5+)
then continuing with 2Sp - 3H shows 4+ hearts so that opener knows I have 5(+)Sp and 4(+)H (and of course I want to go for game).

(Similarly 1NT - 2Di - 2H - 2Sp will show 5+H and 4 spades).

[Trinidad]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 05:54, said:

Transfer to a minor followed by a new suit would show shortness, so partner will in that case think you have 1x6x and a game force.

Yes, so you ethically bid 3♠, partner will alert (and when asked explain it shows a GF with short spades).

Partner will make a next bid. You, again, will just act as if you have been showing long and weak spades all the time. You keep doing the ethical thing, and keep bidding as if partner has shown a 15-17 NT with a spade fit and something about diamonds, and whatever he would show with his next bid.

In your mind, you should have given up all hope to get a good auction. The only thing is to keep making the ethical bid. Don't worry anymore about this ending in 7NTX. Such is life.

Rik

[pran]

Trinidad, on 2014-March-03, 07:37, said:

Yes, so you ethically bid 3♠, partner will alert (and when asked explain it shows a GF with short spades).

Partner will make a next bid. You, again, will just act as if you have been showing long and weak spades all the time. You keep doing the ethical thing, and keep bidding as if partner has shown a 15-17 NT with a spade fit and something about diamonds, and whatever he would show with his next bid.

In your mind, you should have given up all hope to get a good auction. The only thing is to keep making the ethical bid. Don't worry anymore about this ending in 7NTX. Such is life.

Rik

I think that this is about all there is to be said, except that there is a hope partner will give up and pass before you reach the 7 Level.

Many years ago I saw a suggestion that there should be two special bids defined in many (not too natural) systems:
1: Partner - I have forgotten our agreements,
and
2: Partner - you must have forgotten our agreements.

Legal or not, maybe this is a case for such special bids?

[Trinidad]

pran, on 2014-March-03, 08:29, said:

I think that this is about all there is to be said, except that there is a hope partner will give up and pass before you reach the 7 Level.

Many years ago I saw a suggestion that there should be two special bids defined in many (not too natural) systems:
1: Partner - I have forgotten our agreements,
and
2: Partner - you must have forgotten our agreements.

Legal or not, maybe this is a case for such special bids?

That is why my partner and I have the STOP card: "Partner, the wheels have come off. STOP bidding!".

(Is a really needed?)

Rik

[barmar]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 04:45, said:

Holding the following hand, partner opens with 1NT (15-17) and RHO bids 2♣ (DONT, showing any long suit).

In DONT, 2♣ shows a 2-suiter including clubs. It shows any long suit in Cappaletti/Hamilton.

This could be relevant. If RHO was actually showing clubs, partner may not believe that you're actually transferring to clubs. 2NT would be Lebensohl, so it's not available as a transfer to diamonds, so 2♠ takes its place since you wouldn't transfer to the suit RHO has shown.

[Bende]

barmar, on 2014-March-03, 10:32, said:

In DONT, 2♣ shows a 2-suiter including clubs. It shows any long suit in Cappaletti/Hamilton.

This could be relevant. If RHO was actually showing clubs, partner may not believe that you're actually transferring to clubs. 2NT would be Lebensohl, so it's not available as a transfer to diamonds, so 2♠ takes its place since you wouldn't transfer to the suit RHO has shown.

You are right, of course! Edited the description. 2♣ showed any long suit, but it was not DONT.

[chrism]

Trinidad, on 2014-March-03, 08:54, said:

That is why my partner and I have the STOP card: "Partner, the wheels have come off. STOP bidding!".

(Is a really needed?)

Rik

7NT also serves well as a "STOP bidding" card, since 8-level contracts are a thing of the distant past.

[mycroft]

I know of at least two systems that have a "we're off the rails" bid:

2NT-3NT (transfer to clubs, 3♠ forces 3NT to play or minor(s) slam try); 4any-4NT ("partner, I forgot, and 3NT was to play" - it's right there in the notes)

and a relay system that used an unusual jump into diamonds to encompass "the wheels have come off somewhere; guess where to play, I'm passing" (4♦ not a jump was a more traditional end signal).

Using them ethically (especially the latter one) is ... potentially difficult. But they were right there in the notes.

There's also the "I'm bored" call - more seriously "I have nothing more to tell you, partner"; which can be used as a "might as well guess, because we're off the rails again" call in extremis.

[Bbradley62]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 04:45, said:

You bid 2♠ before realizing that 2♠ is not natural but instead showing clubs...

lamford, on 2014-March-03, 05:21, said:

... Partner's 3♦ can only be a good hand for spades...

Trinidad, on 2014-March-03, 07:37, said:

... You, again, will just act as if you have been showing long and weak spades all the time...

I think we're missing OP's statement that, according to his partnership's actual agreement, 2♠ shows clubs. If that's the case, then (a) 3♦ is not a good hand for spades, and (b) rebidding 3♠ would not just be showing long and weak spades.

[lamford]

Bbradley62, on 2014-March-03, 16:50, said:

I think we're missing OP's statement that, according to his partnership's actual agreement, 2♠ shows clubs. If that's the case, then (a) 3♦ is not a good hand for spades, and (b) rebidding 3♠ would not just be showing long and weak spades.

(a) 3♦ is a good hand for spades from West's point of view. He has bid what he thinks is a non-forcing 2♠ and his partner has moved on, surely showing something like a transfer break, and
(b) therefore rebidding 3♠ would be his normal bid.

Law 75 explains how the woken-up mis-bidder is supposed to act.

[Cyberyeti]

mycroft, on 2014-March-03, 15:32, said:

I know of at least two systems that have a "we're off the rails" bid:

2NT-3NT (transfer to clubs, 3♠ forces 3NT to play or minor(s) slam try); 4any-4NT ("partner, I forgot, and 3NT was to play" - it's right there in the notes)

and a relay system that used an unusual jump into diamonds to encompass "the wheels have come off somewhere; guess where to play, I'm passing" (4♦ not a jump was a more traditional end signal).

Using them ethically (especially the latter one) is ... potentially difficult. But they were right there in the notes.

There's also the "I'm bored" call - more seriously "I have nothing more to tell you, partner"; which can be used as a "might as well guess, because we're off the rails again" call in extremis.

Unopposed 1N-2♥(transfer)-3N is one of these sequences, last time I used it, I held ♣AKQJ, ♥Kxx, ♦xx, ♣xxxx

[pran]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-04, 07:21, said:

Unopposed 1N-2♥(transfer)-3N is one of these sequences, last time I used it, I held ♣AKQJ, ♥Kxx, ♦xx, ♣xxxx

Four Clubs on each side of the two red suits in your hand?

3NT seems to have been a very wise bid, did partner accept?

[Cyberyeti]

pran, on 2014-March-04, 08:31, said:

Four Clubs on each side of the two red suits in your hand?

3NT seems to have been a very wise bid, did partner accept?

Discovering your 4(32)4 is actually 0(32)8 during the auction is a little awkward.

I played 3N+1 I think, I usually have a fairly expressive face but this time managed to keep very calm at the point I realised the mis-sort (after partner transferred)

[mycroft]

I've never seen that, but I have seen 1NT-2♣; 4♠ and 1NT-2♥ (transfer); 4♥ where the answer to the question was "I think partner has just realized that their [minor] was also [same colour major]" (used in one case, "I have no idea" but that was clearly what it was in the other).

My partner the 4♠ time was righteously upset, especially when the opening club lead got ruffed. It took a while to explain.

I agree, it's a little harder when you have a minor.

[Bbradley62]

Bende, on 2014-March-03, 04:45, said:

You bid 2♠ before realizing that 2♠ is not natural but instead showing clubs, since you play system on after interferene with 2♣. Partner makes a slightly delayed alert, explains 2♠ as showing diamonds...

lamford, on 2014-March-04, 05:41, said:

(a) 3♦ is a good hand for spades from West's point of view. He has bid what he thinks is a non-forcing 2♠ and his partner has moved on, surely showing something like a transfer break, and
(b) therefore rebidding 3♠ would be his normal bid.

Law 75 explains how the woken-up mis-bidder is supposed to act.

I still disagree. OP says he was woken up by his own memory, not by partner's alert. If they had been playing with screens, OP would have bid 2♠, then realized this showed clubs, then heard/seen his partner bid 3♦, which would probably be showing good club support from West's point of view. 3♠ might still be right, but he shouldn't think pard showed spade support.

This post has been edited by Bbradley62: 2014-March-04, 19:44

[barmar]

Even though the player may have woken up to his mistake on his own, he's still constrainted by the UI laws, so he may not choose an LA that could demonstrably have been suggested by the UI.

[Zelandakh]

mycroft, on 2014-March-03, 15:32, said:

I know of at least two systems that have a "we're off the rails" bid:

When I first started playing my relay system, I was happily relaying my way towards slam when my partner of the time made an impossible jump. I knew it was impossible because she had shown several cards I was looking at. I had no idea what was going on but made sure we were in the right denomination and all was well. I asked her afterwards and she said she had not gotten that far in the system notes yet and so just jumped to the most likely end contract. It subsequently got adapted to a system agreement for the learning phase. That would be your truly classic "we're off the rails!" agreement.