More UI
West North East South
Pass 1NT X Pass (after some hesitation)
Pass 2C(Alert) Pass 2S
X
TD was called by East after the bidding had ended. The board was allowed to be played in 2 S X by South making 6 tricks giving E/W a score of 500. It was subsequently changed to an adjusted score of 800 to E/W (Contract 1 NTX by North making 4 tricks).
That all seems reasonable.
N/S are playing some form of Halmic, but I don't think the one where Pass forces redouble.
North has 4-2-3-4. South interpreted 2C as Staymanish (it wasn't!).
The hesitation suggests that one (or more) of three things may have happened:
(a) S was having difficulty remembering the system
(b) S had a difficult choice of bid; or
(c) S may not have made the right bid according to the system.
It seems to me that in all cases North has a logical alternative in Pass,
however the hesitation does not SPECIFICALLY suggest bidding 2C.
So a counter argument has been put forward.
N does have UI,
however that does not 'demonstrably suggest' any specific action,
therefore N is free to do bid as he/she chooses.
Does anyone buy the counter argument?
Comments
It suggests not passing, and so it suggests any chosen action over pass.
I use Law 73C1 in such cases. However it is important to find out whether 'Pass' forces opener to take some action since 16B1b ensures we don't try and impose our own 'bridge logic' on the offenders.
Indeed. Hence the question to North: "Why did you bid 2 !c?"
Barrie Partridge - CTD for Bridge Club Live
I was just about to type this out and Barrie beat me to it :)
Peter Bushby Suffolk
I wasn't TD so I can't be definite, but knowing N/S well, I am pretty sure Pass does not force redouble.
I only got involved when this was discussed at the end of the evening.
North's rationale for bidding seemed to be 'but I only have a small doubleton Heart'