BBO Discussion Forums: Adjustment after Ghestem - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Adjustment after Ghestem EBU

#1 User is offline   VixTD 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,052
  • Joined: 2009-September-09

Posted 2018-February-01, 08:21

An EBU Garden Cities county qualifier, teams-of-eight scored by IMPs between pairs of tables, then adding the result and converting to VPs.

NS play five-card majors and a strong NT, 1♣ could have been a three-card suit.
3♣ was alerted and explained when South asked as ♦ and ♠, but the actual agreement was ♥ and ♠.

Result: 3NT(S)-3, NS +300, lead ♠2.

The incorrect explanation was established at the end of play. South wanted a ruling because she claimed she would not have bid 3NT had she been told East had both majors. I asked her why she had bid 3NT with the incorrect explanation, with only seven points, and she said it was on the strength of the club fit and stops in the opponents' suits. I asked her what she would have bid over the correct explanation, and she said she would have passed.

What score, if anything, would you adjust to?
0

#2 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2018-February-01, 09:12

View PostVixTD, on 2018-February-01, 08:21, said:

An EBU Garden Cities county qualifier, teams-of-eight scored by IMPs between pairs of tables, then adding the result and converting to VPs.

NS play five-card majors and a strong NT, 1♣ could have been a three-card suit.
3♣ was alerted and explained when South asked as ♦ and ♠, but the actual agreement was ♥ and ♠.

Result: 3NT(S)-3, NS +300, lead ♠2.

The incorrect explanation was established at the end of play. South wanted a ruling because she claimed she would not have bid 3NT had she been told East had both majors. I asked her why she had bid 3NT with the incorrect explanation, with only seven points, and she said it was on the strength of the club fit and stops in the opponents' suits. I asked her what she would have bid over the correct explanation, and she said she would have passed.

What score, if anything, would you adjust to?

I would accept South's statement of passing and take it from there.
If East/West most likely would end up with more than 300 I would let the table result stand, otherwise I would adjust.
0

#3 User is offline   paulg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,082
  • Joined: 2003-April-26
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scottish Borders

Posted 2018-February-01, 10:32

I'm often asked by directors to help with such a situation so I hope my recommendations are lawful (appreciate comments if they are not).

I tend to believe that South would not bid three no trump with the correct explanation and passing is certainly possible, although I'm less convinced that a person who bids three no trump with this hand opposite a weak no trump would be able to stay silent. But I will assume it is the case.

West would probably bid 3D here although it depends on their Ghestem style, which I'd like to ask them. Then I'd need to ask what 3D means in this auction, but I suspect for many pairs it would be an enquiry over which East would bid 3H. West would think this shows a strong two-suiter and could bid 4S now, which East would pass. Most lines seem to be two down after a club lead.

So I'd obviously have to discover their methods after 3C, but I can see changing the score to NS +200 from NS -300 is probably not a big stretch.
The Beer Card

I don't work for BBO and any advice is based on my BBO experience over the decades
1

#4 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2018-February-01, 11:01

View Postpaulg, on 2018-February-01, 10:32, said:

I'm often asked by directors to help with such a situation so I hope my recommendations are lawful (appreciate comments if they are not).

I tend to believe that South would not bid three no trump with the correct explanation and passing is certainly possible, although I'm less convinced that a person who bids three no trump with this hand opposite a weak no trump would be able to stay silent. But I will assume it is the case.

West would probably bid 3D here although it depends on their Ghestem style, which I'd like to ask them. Then I'd need to ask what 3D means in this auction, but I suspect for many pairs it would be an enquiry over which East would bid 3H. West would think this shows a strong two-suiter and could bid 4S now, which East would pass. Most lines seem to be two down after a club lead.

So I'd obviously have to discover their methods after 3C, but I can see changing the score to NS +200 from NS -300 is probably not a big stretch.

Well I suppose it seems a reasonable gamble at teams to try for a low-count 3NT - if the clubs run you are going to be pretty close to it - partner could have 4 or even 5 clubs for their opening bid (I know this is unusual but players DO sometimes hold the denomination they bid).

NB the North hand is not known to be a weak no trump. It could be quite distributional - or even 18-19 balanced.

Other than that, I think you have it right. It depends on methods of course (as you say), but giving a default opinion on a forum (with a caveat) seems a sensible thing to do. For instance: The Ghestem call might only be made on intermediate hands, for instance, when 4 ♠ looks to be less likely.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

#5 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,570
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-February-01, 11:24

View Postweejonnie, on 2018-February-01, 11:01, said:

NB the North hand is not known to be a weak no trump. It could be quite distributional - or even 18-19 balanced.

If they're that strong there's a good chance they'll reopen. There's no need to make a unilateral decision.

On the other hands, preempts are intended to give opponents problems like this. Assuming clubs run and a lead in one of RHO's expected suits, you just need partner to have 2 fast tricks outside clubs, not a huge gamble.

#6 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,853
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2018-February-01, 15:19

If West realised that his explanation was incorrect, then I understand he should have summoned the Director before play commenced.
If not, would it not have been more reasonable to lead a diamond?
0

#7 User is offline   steve2005 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,161
  • Joined: 2010-April-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada
  • Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2018-February-01, 16:31

People who can't remember Ghestem should have their bridge license taken away. Even Ghestem stopped playing it from all the forgets.
Sarcasm is a state of mind
0

#8 User is offline   wank 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,866
  • Joined: 2008-July-13

Posted 2018-February-01, 16:38

View Postpescetom, on 2018-February-01, 15:19, said:


If not, would it not have been more reasonable to lead a diamond?


no
0

#9 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,152
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2018-February-01, 16:54

View Postwank, on 2018-February-01, 16:38, said:

no


err why not ?

With a club stop, the lead of ♦J would appear to need little more than ♦10xxxx and an entry.
0

#10 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2018-February-01, 17:40

View Postpescetom, on 2018-February-01, 15:19, said:

If West realised that his explanation was incorrect, then I understand he should have summoned the Director before play commenced.
If not, would it not have been more reasonable to lead a diamond?

The actual word is 'must'
(the strongest word, a serious matter indeed) - which presumably means that the lawmakers expect a PP to be issued whenever he fails to do so.

"If a player realizes during the auction that his own explanation was erroneous or incomplete, he must summon the Director before the end of the Clarification Period and correct the misexplanation. He may elect to call the Director sooner, but he is under no obligation to do so. (For a correction during the play period, see Law 75B2.)"
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

#11 User is offline   lamford 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,444
  • Joined: 2007-October-15

Posted 2018-February-02, 06:07

View Postweejonnie, on 2018-February-01, 17:40, said:

The actual word is 'must'
(the strongest word, a serious matter indeed) - which presumably means that the lawmakers expect a PP to be issued whenever he fails to do so.

"If a player realizes during the auction that his own explanation was erroneous or incomplete, he must summon the Director before the end of the Clarification Period and correct the misexplanation. He may elect to call the Director sooner, but he is under no obligation to do so. (For a correction during the play period, see Law 75B2.)"

We are not told that West realised his misexplanation during the auction. "The incorrect explanation was established at the end of play" is in the OP.

I agree that South would pass over 3C with the correct explanation (although I would bid 4C) - it matters not an iota whether 3NT is a good bid with the wrong explanation; it is reasonable as xx Jxxx Ax AKxxx makes game in NT cold. After South passes, West, with a double fit, might well bid 4S, or might settle for 3 (I would poll) and North-South will defend. I think South would double 4S but pass out 3S, and always lead her singleton heart. I would therefore adjust to 50% of +100 for NS and 50% of +500. Nothing NS did is remotely esewogian (a new word created by Donald Trump) so the same score for both sides.
I prefer to give the lawmakers credit for stating things for a reason - barmar
0

#12 User is offline   paulg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,082
  • Joined: 2003-April-26
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scottish Borders

Posted 2018-February-02, 06:39

View Postlamford, on 2018-February-02, 06:07, said:

I agree that South would pass over 3C with the correct explanation (although I would bid 4C) - it matters not an iota whether 3NT is a good bid with the wrong explanation; it is reasonable as xx Jxxx Ax AKxxx makes game in NT cold. After South passes, West, with a double fit, might well bid 4S, or might settle for 3 (I would poll) and North-South will defend. I think South would double 4S but pass out 3S, and always lead her singleton heart. I would therefore adjust to 50% of +100 for NS and 50% of +500. Nothing NS did is remotely esewogian (a new word created by Donald Trump) so the same score for both sides.

I agree with polling but doubt that West will bid 4♠ on such a double fit opposite the type of values East has (or presumably could have). It is more interesting whether non-game bidders bid 3♦ or 3♠ - at imps you'd expect the safer partscore to be better especially in a potentially uncontested auction.
The Beer Card

I don't work for BBO and any advice is based on my BBO experience over the decades
0

#13 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-February-02, 06:46

Surely
4C 4D P 4H P 4S
is a possible auction? Or just 4C 4S?
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#14 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,853
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2018-February-02, 07:32

View Postlamford, on 2018-February-02, 06:07, said:

We are not told that West realised his misexplanation during the auction. "The incorrect explanation was established at the end of play" is in the OP.

What we are told does not exclude the possibility that West did realise his misexplanation during the auction but without admitting it, or that he continued to believe his explanation but received UI suggesting that partner had not intended that combination of suits.
The question I think is whether his chosen lead is compatible with the explanation offered, given his diamonds.
I don't play Ghestem, but my understanding is that it should be genuinely competitive and both suits must have some strength.
I certainly would not want partner taking me to 3 level on xxxxx however good the other suit was.
0

#15 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2018-February-02, 11:38

View Postlamford, on 2018-February-02, 06:07, said:

We are not told that West realised his misexplanation during the auction. "The incorrect explanation was established at the end of play" is in the OP.

I agree that South would pass over 3C with the correct explanation (although I would bid 4C) - it matters not an iota whether 3NT is a good bid with the wrong explanation; it is reasonable as xx Jxxx Ax AKxxx makes game in NT cold. After South passes, West, with a double fit, might well bid 4S, or might settle for 3 (I would poll) and North-South will defend. I think South would double 4S but pass out 3S, and always lead her singleton heart. I would therefore adjust to 50% of +100 for NS and 50% of +500. Nothing NS did is remotely esewogian (a new word created by Donald Trump) so the same score for both sides.


'esewogian' is misspelt - there is no 'w' in it.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

#16 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2018-February-03, 04:37

View Postweejonnie, on 2018-February-02, 11:38, said:

'esewogian' is misspelt - there is no 'w' in it.

OK, so we have some confusion over its spelling. Do we know how it is pronounced? Do we even know what it means?
0

#17 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2018-February-03, 06:22

View PostfromageGB, on 2018-February-03, 04:37, said:

OK, so we have some confusion over its spelling. Do we know how it is pronounced? Do we even know what it means?

Serious Error - Wild Or Gambling
0

#18 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,686
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2018-February-03, 11:02

Extremely serious error (unrelated to the infraction) or gambling. "Wild" is no long part of it, and "extremely" is intended, I think, to emphasize that merely "serious" errors aren't enough to trigger the relevant law.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#19 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,570
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-February-03, 19:58

So another reason they shouldn't have changed the law -- "esogian" doesn't sounds as funny.:)

#20 User is offline   VixTD 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,052
  • Joined: 2009-September-09

Posted 2018-February-05, 13:13

I was interested to see how many of you would believe that South would pass with a correct explanation. I didn't, and adjusted to a mixture of 4♣(N)=, 5♣(N)-1 and 4 something (W)-4.
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users