Mis-information - convention not alerted
The bidding went:
West was Dealer and opened 1NT (announced as 12-14), North bid 2D. This was not Alerted. East queried if the bid was natural (believing that N/S played Astro and South had forgotten to Alert); South said that the 2D bid was natural. East bid 2NT, holding 11 HCPs and a 5-card D suit to the K. West raised to 3NT, also holding a D stop (Q 10 7).
North then made it clear that South had mis-informed East/West. This is illegal (Law 20F5(a) and (b). Nobody called the Director at this point. South had gained UI by this, though this wasn’t actually relevant to the play as South had nothing to contribute to the play (holding just a J). North had 5 S and 4 C and singleton DA.
West made 7 tricks, going two off. West said he played the hand on the assumption that North had 5 D, though it quickly became apparent that this wasn’t the case as South followed suit when a D was led! The (playing) Director was called at the end of the hand and he later looked at the hand at the end of the session and decided not to make any adjustment. The hand was played at 5 other tables, 2 Wests made 8 tricks, 1 West made 7, and 1 East made 7. The remaining East played in 2D!
I believe that the Director should have adjusted the score to -1. Would this seem fair? Are there any other Laws that could/should have been applied?
IanC
Comments
Well you may look at 12C1e - although I think this doesn't apply as there isn't an extremely serious error unrelated to the infraction or a gambling action and Law 11a (correction of offender's score if the non-offenders accept a correction through ignorance and potential loss of rectification if NOS take action without calling the director.)
The TD has to decide what would happen if EW had been given the correct information, not necessarily how West would play the contract in 3NT and change his play, since EW might not have bid 3NT in the first place!
It is quite possible that the TD would decide that, given the correct information, East would pass and from the information provided South would also pass since he believes the 2!D call to be natural. Note that EW are not allowed to know that NS are having a bidding misunderstanding, just the information allowed in Law 20F. He may decide that East would double to show diamonds (or preferably ask EW what the agreements are if any) - in which case South would probably pass (unhappily) - the double will not be alerted, but for different reasons, so South will probably think it is for takeout! and North will have to call based on what South's pass means (presumably asking partner to show his other suit - but he would have to confirm this.)
So: I can see some apportionment to 2D-? and 3C? (or whatever the suit is) for NS: it would be up to the TD to decide whether Law 11a should be applied i.e. a split ruling.
This is why polling should take place to find out likely scenarios - although I appreciate that in a club this may not be practical to any great extent.