Have NS shot themselves in the foot?
All NV
The 2S was intended by E as McKendrick (11 points or long minor) to which the response should be 2NT or 3C.
W did not alert the 2S. EW did not have an agreement about whether systems were still on after an intervening double (E thought they were, W that they were not).
NS are unhappy about the outcome.
As always, there are UI and MI considerations.
On UI, I'm happy with E's 2D.
On MI, I'm struggling slightly.
There is clearly MI (Law 21B1b) - but have NS caused their own problems?
Firstly, S knows from their own hand that 2S cannot be natural.
Secondly, why not bid 4S after the 2D?
S's double is a poor call anyway. If they are taking 2S as natural (which N will), then it's takeout. Why not pass or bid 4S?
I have sympathy for NS (it's much easier for them if the 2S is alerted) but I can't help feeling they have been hoist by their own petard. Law 12C1e: is this an "extremely serious error", and is it "unrelated to the infraction"? Did they " hope(d) to recover
through rectification" if it went wrong? Is S's X a (vain) attempt to get a massive penalty?
Or is S just in a really awkward position because of the failure to alert?
What would you rule?
Comments
Not the McKendrick I recognise but ok, they think it can include weak minor suit hands. It is a fairly clear cut failure to alert. Maybe NS should have worked it out, but it seems hard to doubt that if they're told "no clear agreement, would be McKendrick without the double" it's hard to doubt 4S would be bid.
North could easily have a spade void, it seems that either the NT opener might have a singleton or East be scrambling on a 4 card suit. I'd still want to bid 4S with the South hand. North seems to have a fairly clear 3NT at their last turn. But these just seem like mistakes to me, it feels like an adjustment.
South's double probably is for penalties, that would vary between partnerships and should be checked.
As JamesC says.
NS found it tough to deal with the information given and got to an inferior outcome, but there is nowhere near any "serious error" here. It happens frequently in MI cases that the information to which the NOS were entitled was "No agreement but might not be natural", or, in this case as JamesC suggests.
I would think that with correct information, there is such a good chance that NS will reach 4S that it probably isn't worth weighting any other outcome. Or maybe 6S? There's a thought! :))
Barrie Partridge - CTD for Bridge Club Live
Thanks everyone.
I find an intriguing element in this.
If W fails to alert, then NS get their restitution.
If W alerts then says "no agreement / IDK, might be conventional", then NS are still in a tricky situation, but have no recourse.
This feels "wrong" somehow. It potentially allows W to bid 2S knowing he can correct to 3D if partner forgets the convention.
I'm confused. This is Realbridge. Why on earth hasn't East alerted their own 2S bid which they intended as Mckendrick?
On normal RealBridge you alert partner's call. It's only with "screens" that you alert your own.
You can play RealBridge with written self-alerts without screens. EBU did so for a couple of years.
Every day's a schoolday!