[schulken]

---

At the table, N put out a STOP card prior to anyone bidding. Before she was able to complete her skip bid, she was told that she was attempting to bid out of turn and I was called. Since her skip bid could have been anything (2C as well as any weak preemptive bid), I allowed her partner (dealer) to call but ignore extraneous information from partner (16B1(a)). S passed and W opened 1C. I instructed N to repeat the call she intended when she originally placed the stop card on the table, and she bid 2H. I allowed the auction to continue as diagrammed. They were off 4 for a bottom. All other tables in the section had NS in 4S making 7.

On reflection, I think when I instructed N to repeat the bid she intended, I should have made her partner pass at his next turn - using 31 A2(a) as guidance. If she had elected to make any other call, I could have barred her partner from the auction. While others I have consulted have suggested that N placing the stop card on the table is tantamount to bidding and I should have barred her partner from the outset, I continue to believe that no one knew what she was about to pull out of her hat and her partner should have at least had a chance to have his voice heard.

Thoughts?

[barmar]

I don't think placing the STOP card on the table counts as making a bid. It's more like starting to take a bid out of the bidding box, but letting go when someone points out that it's not your turn. I don't even think North has to repeat the call she was originally planning, but if she doesn't make a skip bid partner has UI that he must avoid taking advantage of.

[bluejak]

I am afraid your ruling is rather wrong. Until a call is made, it is not made, if you see what I mean. Taking a stop card out is not a call that has been made.

Therefore, it does not matter what North intended: that does not affect your ruling in any way.

South has UI from the stop card: you should warn him to avoid taking any advantage from that - if necessary read Law 73C out to him - and tell E/W if they have any doubts to call you back at the end. North can bid whatever he likes: he is not constrained in any way.

If you are called back you consider whether to adjust because of South's calls under Law 16B.

[iviehoff]

Where in the law book did you find a law that said that a player must later do what he earlier had in mind to do? Answer: nowhere. There is no provision of that nature anywhere in the law book. So you must have made this one up, as opposed to ruled on the basis of a law that exists.

Suggestion: rule on the basis of a laws that exist, don't make it up as you go along.

Here is how much you were making it up as you were going along. If N has made a call out of rotation (which you seem to think he has), then the law says E should have been given the opportunity to accept it. If N has made a call out of rotation, which has been cancelled (you have ruled it cancelled, because you have reverted the auction to the correct bidder), then the law says N is free to make any call at his turn, although there would then be restrictions on S (you'd heard of that bit, but didn't know when to apply it).

But actually N has not made a call at all (18A). So N and S are free to make whatever calls they like, subject only to the constraints of having unauthorised information. If N had been using spoken or written bidding, or the kind of boards where you point to number and denomination separately, and had got as far as saying/writing/pointing "three..." before being stopped, N would still not have made a call, though the unauthorised information situation would be quite strong in this case.

[schulken]

I appreciate the feedback and information. I should point out that I only became a club director just over a month ago and was pointed to this forum as a good place to get input. I agree that it has been, although the acerbic tone of some of the replies I don't see the need for, unless the responders enjoy being able to say unkind things anonymously that they would never say face-to-face. Regardless, if I felt the matters were clear cut or could be read directly from the rule book, I wouldn't have made the post. If experienced directors and tournament players hadn't disagreed on a solution, there would be no need to obtain other views from people who participate in this forum, and presumably take their responsibilities as directors as seriously as I.

[blackshoe]

One of the purposes of these forums, perhaps the main purpose, is to allow inexperienced directors to learn from more experienced ones. That purpose may be foiled if inexperienced directors are reluctant to post here because of the tone of some responses.

I recommend everyone read or hopefully re-read the first two posts in the "forum rules" thread periodically, particularly the second one, and try to remember that people do make mistakes, and derision is not a good teaching tool.

[mycroft]

One reason why "make the bid you were going to make" is incorrect (over and above the fact that there's no Law to say that) is that North has an aggressive 2NT call here, and would make it normally. There's still UI - and it's likely, in fact, that South can figure out that he meant to bid 2♥ first (because he wouldn't have bid 2♦ with 5=6 in the reds unless he's playing EHAA); so South's got some problems if he decides to bid 3♥ with, say, 2=4 in the reds.

That will frequently happen - there's a call I was going to make, but now I have a different call. And wouldn't you have felt concerned if he did have a 22-count and was going to open 2♣ - which is now Michaels?

[ahydra]

I hope you mean "EW in 4S making 7" - else some miracle happened, multiple times!

As bluejak mentioned, pulling out the STOP does not consitute making a call, so any ruling on the basis that N called out of turn is incorrect. Banning South from the auction is doubly harsh

ahydra

[jallerton]

iviehoff, on 2011-December-06, 02:45, said:

Suggestion: rule on the basis of a laws that exist, don't make it up as you go along.

That's a good suggestion. Would you mind passing that on to the WBFLC?

[barmar]

Isn't it the job of the WBFLC to make up laws?

[Xiaolongnu]

It occurs to me that this exact situation is covered in the Orange Book under 7B10 that a skip bid warning in particular pulling out a Stop card (accidentally) is not considered BOOT although any information associated with it is UI. Not that I really needed to comment honestly, seeing as Mr Stevenson the chief editor of the book has made a similar explanation above here, but just to reiterate and highlight that this is a generally established agreement among Directors.