Allowed corrected inadmissible double
North opens 1 Heart, East bids 1 Spade, South passes and West doubles their partner's bid. When this is pointed out (by a player) West corrects the call to 2 Clubs, north passes and East bids 2 Diamonds. At which point the director is finally called by South because of the potential unauthorised information.
Other than tearing my hair out and the desire to throw all four of them in the brig for 30 days with only bread and water, what should the ruling be? (Had I been called at the proper time, it is of course straightforward - West can make any call they like but East is shut out for the rest of the auction etc.)
Comments
This one has me puzzled. From the info given how do we decide who gets the bread and who gets the water? Weejonnie hasn't said who the "by a player" was, so how do we decide " which players were taking advantage of the laws in ways that are perceived as unfair." It looks as if South knows something of the laws, but what of the others. was South "by a player" according to weejonnie? Should we let the auction continue, get a result and work from there?
Still puzzled. We still have several days before they get out of the brig to settle this.
CMOT
North opens 1 heart: East overcalls 1 Spade: South passes: West doubles their partner's 1 Spade bid
North (or South) says in effect that you can't do this and asks West to change their call - South changes their call to 2 clubs. North passes
East now bids 2 Diamonds - at THIS point South calls the TD about possible UI implications.
Hope that makes it clearer. Board 13 below
https://www.bridgewebs.com/cgi-bin/bwor/bw.cgi?pid=display_rank&event=20221104_1&club=neba
I do not know which player pointed out the error (odds are heavily in favour of NS)
Based on Law 11, I would expect to award the table result to NS and give EW the result from playing in 2C, since this barred East from bidding further. Some percentage of 2C + 1 & 2C +2 will give EW a zero.
EW got to 3NT going off: Scoring 4 out of 14. 2 Clubs making scores better.
Hi have looked at the hand and given Gordon's suggestion I am not sure how the end result attained will be changed, or that it will make much difference. I assume from Gordon's comment that E/W "were taking advantage of the laws in ways that are perceived as unfair." [from the white book]. Not sure how that conclusion was reached. It isn't that I disagree, just can't see how.
I hadn't realised they had gone off. In that case leave the table result as it is, tell them to call the TD whenever there is an infraction, and tell EW they would probably have got a better result if they had not made their own ruling!
Thank you Gordon. Can see the merit in doing that. That helps understand.
I think Weejonnie should keep them in the brig for a bit longer though.