Another "AI or UI" problem?

ais523

Imagine the following bidding sequence:

{b1hpx1s}

At this point, someone notices that East's double is inadmissible (Law 35A) and calls the Director. East's LHO has called, so by Law 36A, the auction reverts to East's call, proceeding "as though there had been no irregularity". That seems straightforward enough.

The confusing part for me is: is South's bid of 1!s AI to North? Based on Law 16C, it depends on which side (if any) is "offending", and that isn't clear to me (if there has been no irregularity, has there been an offending side)? Also, Law 16C is only relevant if the 1!s counts as a withdrawn action, and that isn't immediately clear either. From the wording of Law 36A, it seems almost as though the Laws don't see the 1!s bid as having existed, so there is no information there to be authorised or unauthorised. So I'm not sure that I'm even applying the correct Laws here.

(Of note: Law 39B has a similarly underspecified rectification, although the circumstances in which it's used, "pass by a defender or any call by declarer/dummy", makes me think that the extra call is intended to be authorised information to everyone, assuming that it was made by accident rather than as part of a prearranged system.)

CMOT_Dibbler

Per Jacob Duschek (Page 115) Law 36A does cancel the double and subsequent bid . The bidding reverts to the doubler to make a call, there is no irregularity with no penalty (forced to pass) on the partner (in this case West) and no lead resitrictions. However, under Law 16C the Double is authorised for N/S but not West and the 1S bid is authorised to E/W but not North. Had South not called then it would be different.

I haven't come across the Law 39B in Jacob's book but I think the fact that there may be lead restrictions (Law 26B ) this will cover the situation for authorised information or not.

Just reading the book makes me worried about going back to face to face!!

Throat
P.S nice question

gordonrainsford

@ais523 said: From the wording of Law 36A, it seems almost as though the Laws don't see the 1!s bid as having existed

Indeed. So the auction went 1H-P and you leave them to get on with it. East made an inadmissible call and South condoned it, so neither side needs any protection - they deserve each other!