BBO Discussion Forums: Rule Change for Insufficient Bid - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Rule Change for Insufficient Bid

#41 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2018-January-30, 09:26

In the auction 1NT-(2)-2, suppose the IB is accepted. If the original 2 bid was artificial, must the offender’s partner assume that the bid means diamonds? What if the original 2 bid had been natural? This matter does not seem to be addressed, and is pretty important.

There are serious problems, as others have noted, with the concept of the “meaning” of an insufficient bid. In the past such a bid could have “meaning” only if it were natural, and could be replaced without penalty only when the lowest bid to make it sufficient is also natural. As problems arise with each iteration of relaxing the Laws concerning insufficient bids, I wonder how long it will take for the DC to come full circle and realise that they should never have fixed what wasn’t broken.

In the meantime, I think that most of these occurrences will end up scored by a volunteer director who may of may not know what he is doing.

Why are the lawmakers so obsessed, anyway? Barring problems with vision or mobility, has anyone made more than one insufficient bid in the past, I don’t know, three years?

Bids out of rotation are also fairly rare, the most common being making the first call when you are not the dealer. And this call is most commonly pass.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#42 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,594
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-January-30, 09:46

 Vampyr, on 2018-January-30, 09:26, said:

Why are the lawmakers so obsessed, anyway? Barring problems with vision or mobility, has anyone made more than one insufficient bid in the past, I don’t know, three years?

Bids out of rotation are also retry rare, the most common being making the first call when you are not the other. And this call is most commonly pass.

We have a tiny club, about 6 tables these days. Yet I think our TD has to deal with an insufficient bid or bid out of rotation at least once every session or two. In a good sized tournament I'll bet there are quite a few of these rulings.

There are also quite a few occasions where the offender immediately claims that it was just a mispull and makes it sufficient. I know we should technically call the TD, but we usually don't bother.

#43 User is offline   WellSpyder 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,627
  • Joined: 2009-November-30
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England

Posted 2018-January-30, 10:50

 Vampyr, on 2018-January-30, 09:26, said:

In the auction 1NT-(2)-2, suppose the IB is accepted. If the original 2 bid was artificial, must the offender’s partner assume that the bid means diamonds? What if the original 2 bid had been natural? This matter does not seem to be addressed, and is pretty important.

This seems rather a good question to me. I assume that in the absence of UI opener can attribute whatever meaning he thinks is appropriate to the IB. But suppose responder said something along the lines of "oops, I didn't see the 2 overcall". Now do we need a poll to decide what the LAs for opener are? Without the UI opener might wonder whether partner thought the overcall was 2, or perhaps they had an aberration and thought they were opening the bidding, or......
1

#44 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2018-January-30, 11:27

 barmar, on 2018-January-30, 09:46, said:

We have a tiny club, about 6 tables these days. Yet I think our TD has to deal with an insufficient bid or bid out of rotation at least once every session or two. In a good sized tournament I'll bet there are quite a few of these rulings.


Another reason to go back to a simpler and easier-to-apply policy.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#45 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2018-January-30, 14:28

 Vampyr, on 2018-January-30, 09:26, said:

Barring problems with vision or mobility, has anyone made more than one insufficient bid in the past, I don’t know, three years?

Yes. But no more than one a week!
0

#46 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2018-February-01, 11:04

If the 2 call COULD have meant diamonds or COULD have meant hearts then a call showing either of these would be OK - I think.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users