[broze]

Just for the record, I was sitting South. North bid 3♦ and one of the opponents asked about the meaning. I told him it was natural without even considering any other possibilities! My partner had an excellent poker face - in reality he was more than a bit nervous.

[han]

Agree with 1H, why should I show my distribution to that idiot partner of mine?

[Zelandakh]

broze, on 2012-February-21, 12:12, said:

Just for the record, I was sitting South. North bid 3♦ and one of the opponents asked about the meaning. I told him it was natural without even considering any other possibilities! My partner had an excellent poker face - in reality he was more than a bit nervous.

I hope your partner cancelled his poker face before the opening lead was faced. He has a duty to tell the defenders that he believes your description of the 3♦ bid was incorrect and what he believes the partnership understanding to be.

[broze]

Zelandakh, on 2012-February-22, 09:52, said:

I hope your partner cancelled his poker face before the opening lead was faced. He has a duty to tell the defenders that he believes your description of the 3♦ bid was incorrect and what he believes the partnership understanding to be.

As I said this was a new partnership and there was no understanding (obviously!) When exactly should he have spoken up? The opponents had no further questions before the opening lead.

[Zelandakh]

broze, on 2012-February-22, 10:05, said:

As I said this was a new partnership and there was no understanding (obviously!) When exactly should he have spoken up? The opponents had no further questions before the opening lead.

After the last pass your partner should explain exactly this, that you are a new partnership and have never discussed what the meaning of a 4th suit bid in this kind of sequence might be. If the Director is called, the opponent that made the last pass will now be given the opportunity to change it. If they do this then you are bound by the UI laws which will usually restrict your options in the ensuing auction.

When your opponents ask you questions you should explain your agreements to them along with any related information you have that might be relevant. You should not say what you think a bid should be if there is no agreement. Any information you provide in answering questions is UI to your partner. They have to continue as if you had given the explanation that was expected and again, their options might be restricted.

At the end of the hand, if the opponents feel that the misinformation damaged them then they may be entitled to redress. The Director will be able to sort this out. This is a normal part of bridge and you should not take it badly if you are ruled against in this way. Of course, in this hand the opponents were probably quite happy with their table score!