Home EBU TDs

Insufficient bid

In the following auction:
2C-p-2D-p-3D-p-3C next in hand pointed out that 3C was an insufficient bid. 3C bidder then immediately pulled out and attempted to make a 4C bid. Next in hand said he needed to call the TD. Both bidders objected stating that it was just a mistake and that correcting with 4C obviated the need to trouble the non-playing TD sitting at a nearby table. Next in hand called the TD and described the auction up to the 3C bid and its replacement with 4C. TD then told 3C bidder that if it wasn't her intended call they could replace it with 4C.
Next in hand advised the TD that this wasn't what had actually happened as the 3C bid was clearly not a mechanical error as bidder was looking at it on the table after it was made.
Does the attempt to correct the insufficient bid before TD arrived along with objecting to TD being called prevent TD from ruling 4C a mechanical error?
Next in hand wanted to accept the 3C bid to make a 3D bid which might have resulted in a profitable sacrifice over the resulting minor suit slam.


  • The TD still has to rule based on the facts. Next in hand could have made a 3D bid if that's what he wanted to do, rather than pointing out the insufficiency. The TD might still rule 3C was a mechanical error but if so, 3D would be authorised for the side bidding it and unauthorised for the other side.

  • Thank you Gordon, that's helpful.

Sign In or Register to comment.