[chrism]

To complete the story - the committee ruled the contract to 6H making 7. I was not privy to their discussion, but I understand that they considered it a close decision.

[Vampyr]

I think that what really happened is that the player knew that they had not agreed how to show a void and so just bid slam. Thus he didn't show any number of aces at all; only a void. I would come down hard on this pair for lying.

[blackshoe]

Vampyr, on 2014-March-17, 04:42, said:

I think that what really happened is that the player knew that they had not agreed how to show a void and so just bid slam. Thus he didn't show any number of aces at all; only a void. I would come down hard on this pair for lying.

And what will you do when it turns out they weren't lying? You are, after all, acting on an assumption which may not be true.

[blackshoe]

Trinidad, on 2014-March-16, 13:13, said:

Don't do that!

Make sure that he gets to bid as few times as possible. Each bid costs 15 seconds. So, no transfers, because they take an extra half round of bidding. Takeout doubles are out for the same reason. Just bid what you can make.

If you would switch to 2/1, at some point someone will fall asleep before the auction is over.

Rik

Maybe - but I'm trying to help him become a better player, not be a hand hog myself.

[Lanor Fow]

I'm with those who don't think that this suggests passing or bidding. I'd be more surprised if, in a not that established partnership, a unusual response to keycard was bid in tempo, than out of it.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2014-March-17, 06:33, said:

And what will you do when it turns out they weren't lying? You are, after all, acting on an assumption which may not be true.

Well, they are not an established partnership, but have bothered to agree a very unusual way of showing 2 KC and a void, yet without touching on how they would handle one or three? Pull the other one!

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2014-March-17, 06:34, said:

Maybe - but I'm trying to help him become a better player, not be a hand hog myself.

The important thing is that with 15 seconds eaten up per bid, it is important to get the auction over with as quickly as possible so you can finish most rounds.

[Cyberyeti]

campboy, on 2014-March-15, 02:23, said:

From West's point of view, there are two possible explanations for the BIT.

1. East might have been considering giving the normal response to RCKB rather than jumping to show the void. This would suggest passing, since he is likely to have a worse hand than a quick 6♥.

2. East might have been unsure which void-showing bid was correct on his hand. If West is confident that 6♥ shows two+void, then this also suggests passing, since East might have gotten it wrong, in which case they are missing a keycard. If West isn't sure what 6♥ shows either, I don't think the hesitation suggests anything in particular.

So I think pass is suggested and 7♥ is the ethical thing to do.

I think Campboy and Gnasher have it right, no adjustment for the reasons they state.

Also, assumptions about what most people play for 1+void/3+void are unwise, for example we only ever show 2+void as we've usually already shown a void before keycard/kickback occurs.

[Trinidad]

chrism, on 2014-March-16, 20:21, said:

To complete the story - the committee ruled the contract to 6H making 7. I was not privy to their discussion, but I understand that they considered it a close decision.

I understand the commitee's decision. But I don't agree with it.

The way I see it, there was no infraction (at first). Hence, there was no reason to adjust. But it is very likely (beyond reasonable doubt?!?) that EW lied about their agreements. As a committee, I would not let EW get away with that.

So, as a committee, I should decide to not adjust, but to hang EW. Such a decision will make everybody involved very unhappy and angry: NS feel bad about not getting an adjusted score when playing against these "lying cheats" and EW will be upset for being called "lying cheats". And it is extremely difficult to make decisions where everybody will be angry and unhappy when you could opt out by simply adjusting the score to 6♥+1, leaving NS happy and EW with a feeling of "we knew this could happen" instead of anger.

Perhaps the AC decision was wiser. It is easy for me to sit in front of my computer and disagree.

Rik