|
Wow, this is why the Director gets paid big buck to unwind this one
The Laws are intended to restore equity Sometimes
there's more going on than meets the eye
Did you know tempo breaks due to U. I. is the number 1 appeal issue at
the National tourneys? Sorry, special agreements are not
allowed to handle insufficient calls While the
Director is judge and jury, remember the outcome is intended to keep the
game fair so skilled players are rewarded |
What is the ruling when my partner immediately accepts an insufficient bid?
Would this convey Unauthorized Information? Also, we play 2D over
opponents' 1 Notrump bid is a conventional DONT bid showing Diamonds and a
major. Here’s the bidding:
2H - (1N) - 2D
As a follow-up, what do the laws say about this situation? Do I alert the
2D as diamond and a major?
The short answer to your question is, yes there was "U. I." Certainly it's
fine for partner as the "Non Offending Side" (NOS) to accept an insufficient
bid and, if applicable, make a conventional response. Duplicate
Decision Law 27 gives a nice explanation of various insufficient bid
scenarios.
Of course, after the 1 Notrump insufficient bid was made by the Left Hand
Opponent, partner should call the Director – doing so does not cause
partner to lose any rights to accept the call. But perhaps the insufficient
bid was a conventional call, such as a
Baron Notrump showing a
preemptive three suited takeout; here the
NOS partner should be aware of more desirable options. Note while the
Director
technically should pull the offender away from the table to avoid
passing U. I. to their partner, not many Directors follow this principle.
As an astute player, you can always follow-up with Director if failing to do
so lead you to believe your side was injured.
Back to your original question, the main form of Unauthorized Information
referenced your statement that partner did not call in tempo,
immediately bidding 2D. While such actions regularly happen
at the table, it is possible that the quick tempo conveyed U. I. to you.
In fact, your opponents' could call the Director for redress according to
Law 73.d.
Duplicate
Decisions and
Director Technical Files offer supporting information if you wish to learn more on this complex
topic.
To your second question about alerting partner's 2D bid after LHOs
insufficient 1 Notrump bid, the ACBL Laws do not address unlikely
scenario as this one. Certainly the ACBL has ruled that partnerships are not
allowed to have a special set of conventional responses after an opponent
makes an insufficient bid. So your side is not allowed to have agreements
such as a special DONT convention after the
insufficient call to show a two suited hand, etc. Along this line,
if
partner instead bid 2H, the natural treatment would be “to
play” showing a Heart fit – not a conventional bid showing the majors.
But back to your initial question, you are not allowed to make any inferences
based on partner's 2D fast-bid over the 1 Notrump call,
sufficient or not. You must assume the bid was made in normal tempo and
play according to your partnership agreements. Finally, after your unique
auction, you are indeed allowed to make any legal bid and partner may take
appropriate action. Again, let me stress that you or your partner should be
aware of your right to call the Director if an opponent makes an
insufficient call. Too often, the NOS is injured when they unknowingly lose
the right to restore equity of
Law 27.b.2.
after an auction going something like:
2N – (P) – 2D with 2D meant as a conventional
transfer
If the 2D bid was not a "slip of the tongue" or a mechanical bidding
box error (thus a slip of the mind), then the 2N opener is barred for
the remainder of the auction. So it's always a good idea to let your
Director help everyone adjuticate such isssues. |
