[jeffford76]

Since some people don't like "fake" ruling questions, let me be clear that although this is based on a real situation, the details are not exactly the same as the real hand.

A pair at the local club is playing a system where over their opponents' opening 1NT (weak or otherwise) a direct double shows a number of one and two suited hand types, or a traditional penalty double of 1NT. Recently after this double, the advancer holding a 4-count passed, correctly so as their partner held the penalty double and they collected a good score. The opponents wonder to you away from the table if the pair doesn't have a tell when they have the strong version, although they are quick to assure you that it is almost certainly subconscious, not that they are deliberately cheating. What would be your steps as a director?

Assuming that one of them is to attempt to ascertain whether this is a pattern, you've never been called about this before, so you don't know how often pass happens or how often they get it right or wrong. Asking questions gives not particularly useful answers like "I don't remember the last time it came up." and "It just seemed like since I only had 4 points my partner *must* have the strong hand." Now what?

[blackshoe]

Record it and move on.

[peterb001]

I think that the first thing to do would be to ask them for a written description of their defense to 1NT.

Within this, after 1NT X Pass, what bids can partner make, and what do each of these show? Given that this is an unusual convention, I think that it is reasonable to insist that this is made available if they are going to play it at your club.

Once you have this, it becomes much clearer whether they follow it, or not.

I don't know what the bidding regulations are in the USA, but I would like to tell them that they can't play this defense at the club until they provide a written description.

[jeffford76]

 peterb001, on 2016-September-07, 15:04, said:

I don't know what the bidding regulations are in the USA...

In the USA, under the most commonly played convention chart, X and 2♣ can have any meaning, and there is no requirement to have any written description or defense. Clubs are free to restrict or allow whatever they wish rather than follow this chart, but it's unusual.

To be clear, the pair explained what all the possibilities were, I just didn't think it was relevant exactly which hands were included.

[nullve]

The meaning of Responder's pass might also be relevant. E.g. if Advancer has

Kxx
Txxx
Jxxx
xx

and the bidding goes

(1N¹)-X²-(P³),

¹ 15-17
² 1-suiter, less than opening strength / 16+
³ 6-7 hcp at most (since Responder would have redoubled for business with 7-8 hcp)

then simple artithmetic will tell thim that partner must have the strong option, at least if opps' bidding can be trusted.

[Trinidad]

I don't get the pair's explanation. I would simply have used Nullve's explanation that advancer figured out from the auction that the double was intended as penalty (some are playing either/or doubles: takeout or penalty and figure out from their own hand and the auction what partner must have).

I don't understand why they start talking about the "subconscious" nature of tells from partner. Any information from partner (other than bidding or play) is extraneous, whether it was received consciously, subconsciously or delivered by Martians.

Rik

[barmar]

 nullve, on 2016-September-07, 17:19, said:

The meaning of Responder's pass might also be relevant. E.g. if Advancer has

Kxx
Txxx
Jxxx
xx

and the bidding goes

(1N¹)-X²-(P³),

¹ 15-17
² 1-suiter, less than opening strength / 16+
³ 6-7 hcp at most (since Responder would have redoubled for business with 7-8 hcp)

then simple artithmetic will tell thim that partner must have the strong option, at least if opps' bidding can be trusted.

If my opponents were playing that method, I would pass as responder with a good hand. If advancer has a weak hand he'll pass because he assumes his partner has the penalty double, and we may get a few doubled overtricks.

Why redouble to tell the opponents what's going on?

[barmar]

 Trinidad, on 2016-September-08, 03:17, said:

I don't understand why they start talking about the "subconscious" nature of tells from partner. Any information from partner (other than bidding or play) is extraneous, whether it was received consciously, subconsciously or delivered by Martians.

I think they're just trying to dissuade accusations of intentional cheating with this method.

[nullve]

 barmar, on 2016-September-08, 08:21, said:

Why redouble to tell the opponents what's going on?

Yes, that would be stupid.

[ggwhiz]

The issue (if there even is one) is disclosure. If it's proper, nothing to be done, if not hang em high.

I consider it obnoxious to play methods that gain solely from unfamiliarity but it's legal.

[barmar]

 ggwhiz, on 2016-September-08, 11:22, said:

I consider it obnoxious to play methods that gain solely from unfamiliarity but it's legal.

Isn't this why Meckwell play reverse suit preference? There's no theoretical advantage, but it catches opponents by surprise. And ACBL doesn't require a pre-alert of this, so the opponents might not even know about it unless they've examined their CC carefully.