Self Protection

GrahamC

I was asked an opinion on this on yesterday.

East had SKJ98; HKJT; DAKJ9; CT4

All NV, S opened 2d described as "our strongest bid, Benji". Full contested auction was: 2d!, 3c, 3h, 4c

It turned out that South's 2D was in fact a weak 2, and 3N + a few was the normal score for EW.

On the face of it simple. NS had no convention card so the benefit of the doubt was against NS deeming a mi-description and not a misbid. So EW damaged, and with correct information E would have bid 3N instead of just competing in 4C. Correct to some combination of 3N+1 or +2.

BUT, is not E in some way culpable? Should he not be sniffing a rat and asking for clarification as there are clearly a lot of points in this pack. With 16 points opposite an overcall he arguably has a 3N bid anyway, from which he can run to 4c if S doubles.
Or can he just have the "double shot" of bidding 4C and if it turns out that it is a mis-description then complain to the TD for damage and correction? E can be described as a "seasoned club player"; not expert and far from a beginner.
We pragmatically felt it best to advise him that we suspect him of going for a "double-shot" against he would not be viewed so favourably, and to adjust to a score that gave him an average, whereas he wanted 3N+2 for a joint top. Not exactly "book" procedure but we felt pragmatic and just.

Tag

Presumably, for there to have been a description of 2D, someone did ask and was duly informed that it was a Benji-2D bid. I'd hold him blameless in this, rather than suggesting that he assume the opponents are fibbing about their agreements and that he should punt something which might be very silly. After all, he'll get no redress if he's wrong.

Then again, is there any evidence that the pair have agreed to play Benji? If there is some reasonable evidence that they do play Benji and that South got confused then we simply have a misbid and he's stuck with the 4C. We might then ask why the 4C was passed out and wonder about fielding.

GrahamC

I got it all second hand, but apparently NS were only an occasional partnreship and hence no solid agreements, let alone a convention card.

Robin_BarkerTD

I don't see how East can protect himself: there was an alert, they asked, they got an answer with no expressed uncertainty. East does not know there has been an infraction, so he can't get the director and remove North to ask South about their agreements or lack of them.

East has got a lot of points on this auction, but West has not promissed any, and North may have taken the opportunity to bid a long heart suit, without many points. It is not clear what East should do, it is not clear to bid either 4C or 3NT.

We don't need to worry too much what we think of 4C - bid with the wrong information. What matters is what East would bid with the right information - but the right information is the information about their agreements or the lack of them, not a description of opener's hand. "No agreement - where we (individually) come from, players play Benji or three-weak-twos, or even a multi". With this information, East might start doubling - and it might get messy.

GrahamC

Seems that X is a possible, in the presence of correct information, so that should be included in the weighted score. 3Hx and 4dx, both minus a few could well occur.

|Just shows the importance of polls with open, non-leading, questions.

Senior_Kibitzer

You might also consider whether West would have called differently with different information.

gordonrainsford

EW are the non-offending side and deserve the protection of the law. Even if East is a little suspicious, what else can he do?