Teams knockout adjustment after illegal bid
South deals and opens 2C, alerted and described as "strong", which also matches the convention card description. However, South's hand is very one-suited and does not meet the accepted defintiion in the blue book "at least 16 HCP, or 13 HCP concentrated in two suits containing 10+ cards".
This is head to head teams, an EBU knockout.
I am unsure of how to score the hand if
(a) without any adjustment, the offending side has gained on it, say 10 imps; or
(b) without any adjustment, the non-offending side has gained, say 8 imps.
Thanks for your advice
Comments
I don't think that the bid is illegal in and of itself.
It may not meet the requirements for a 'strong hand', however, this is for agreements rather than for the bids themselves. This in no way precludes the option for a player to ignore their system and so something else, such as psych.
Law 40 C 1
Psyching a strong hand when one has a weak/intermediate hand is perfectly acceptable - though fielding that psych would not be acceptable.
Law 40 A
I would initially want to check if the pair has an illegal systemic agreement or not. Checking the system card is one way, but also questioning the players (preferably separately to each other), for the player that opened 2C, "why did you open 2C?" is a good starting point. If their answer is along the lines of, "well, it's a strong hand" then it would indicate that they would always open such hands as 2C and if their partnership has been playing together for a few months then it is likely that they will have developed an implicit understanding even without explicitly agreeing.
However, if they say, "I know it is not really strong enough but opened 2C on this occasion..." then it would sound more likely that this was some sort of deviation/psych.
For their partner, you could ask what they would open with that hand... if they also open 2C then it looks more like an illegal system (implicit unless they had discussed these sorts of hands). If they say that they would have opened 4H or whatever, then it seems less likely to be an understanding.
I would also have a look at the hands, if the responder to 2C did not push to a slam with a 12 count (or similar) opposite the 2C open, then that would be good evidence that they do open 2C with non-strong hands. If they bid game with a 2 count, then it would be good evidence that they did expect a strong hand for the 2C open.
If an adjusted score is needed, then at IMPs I think it is +3 IMPs to the NOS and -3 IMPS to the offending side.
White Book 8.40.1.7 Misbidding a strong artificial opening
A psychic strong artificial 2C opening is permitted but a player who makes a strong call on an
unsuitable hand with no intention to deceive has not psyched. However, if the hand is not
‘strong’ by the definitions of permitted agreements in the Blue Book but is understood by the
player to be a 2C opening then the player may have used an illegal agreement.
Example
A player opens 2C because they have eight semi-solid spades and no other high
cards saying that they want to be in game. If the player and their partner consider
this the correct opening then the opening bid is not a departure from the
partnership agreement and the player has not psyched. However, if 2C is a strong
opening bid (EBU Blue Book, section 7C1 (a)) then the partnership understanding is
illegal, and the pair will receive AVE− (unless they do worse than that on the board
– see §2.8.3.2)
Thank you both. How do I apply the adjustment in a knockout teams match ?
If the non-offending side gained well on the board anyway, do I just add in the +3/-3 penalty ? Or leave the score unadjusted with no penalty ?
If the offending side gained significantly on the board, then do I wipe their gain and instead substitute +3/-3 ?
you would only apply an assigned score if the NOS did not gain 3 IMPs or more at the table...
For example, if the NOS scored 2 IMPs (and the offending side -2), then correct to +3 and -3
If the NOS scored 4 IMPs, then they have already gained more than the 3 IMP assigned score would be so the table result stands. Essentially, if the NOS gained 3+ IMPs on the board, then they have not really been damaged by the offence. However, if the 2C open allowed them to play 4H whereas 4S by the ops is an easy find without the misleading 2C bid and they have -7 IMPs, then they have clearly been damaged.
Obviously this would only apply if it were determined that it was an illegal agreement and not a psych.