[movingon]

My right hand opponent opens 1♣! (precision)
I bid 1♥
LHO bids 1♥


Partner does not accept the bid.
How should the director rule and what laws do you reference in making this ruling?

Thanks.
Noreen (movingon)

[RMB1]

movingon, on 2011-March-10, 16:57, said:

How should the director rule and what laws do you reference in making this ruling?

The director should proceed with care, with primary reference to Law 27.

Law 27B1a tells us that if (the insufficient) 1H is incontrovertibly not artificial [quite possible] and a replacement bid of 2H is incontrovertibly not artificial [not very likely] then offender can bid 2H and opener will not be silenced.

Law 27B1b tells us that if offender makes a bid/pass/double that shows the sames as (or is more precise than) 1H then that call will not silence opener.

Law 27B2 tells us that if offender make another bid/pass then opener is silenced.

Law 27B3 tells us that offender can not double unless it shows the sames as (or is more precise than) 1H.

To apply the law, the TD needs to understanding the meaning of 1H [probably the same as 1C-(P)-1H, but may be the same as an opening 1H] and understand the meaning of calls after 1C-(1H)-?.

All this should have been explained to partner before the non-acceptence of the insufficient bid

[mycroft]

and, of course, the meaning of 1H overcall of a Precision 1C, and whether 1H was a mispull and 2H (for instance, but pass or 3C is much less likely a mispull) was intended.

I only bring that up because I play Precision, and only about half my opponents' 1H overcalls actually show hearts. If this one doesn't, it is quite likely that 2H would be natural.

Having said that, my partnership had better not do this, because while 2H might be natural after 1H-showing two non-touching suits, 1H shows *spades*, so we're out of luck. Of course, if 1H *was* natural, 2*D* would be "game-forcing, with spades"; I might be able to convince the TDs that 27B1b applies.

Robin's argument about "care" is strongly seconded.

[movingon]

RMB1, on 2011-March-10, 17:22, said:

The director should proceed with care, with primary reference to Law 27.

Law 27B1a tells us that if (the insufficient) 1H is incontrovertibly not artificial [quite possible] and a replacement bid of 2H is incontrovertibly not artificial [not very likely] then offender can bid 2H and opener will not be silenced.

The 1♥ bid would have shown 5 hearts and positive count.
The director didn't really ask any questions about the meaning of the 2 heart bid, although after I suggested that the 2 heart bid there would not have been natural, but rather conventional, the opponent said her heart bid was natural. While I believe that the 1♥ bid was natural, I doubt that a 2♥ bid over my 1♥ overcall would have been considered a natural heart bid, but the director treated it as such and allowed the 2♥bid to stand without penalty. The opponents eventually arrived at a 5club contract, making.

Law 27B1b tells us that if offender makes a bid/pass/double that shows the sames as (or is more precise than) 1H then that call will not silence opener.

I cannot think of a bid in this sequence after the 1♥ overcall that could show LHO's 5 hearts and positive count.

Law 27B2 tells us that if offender make another bid/pass then opener is silenced.

I believe that this is what should have happened. LHO had to decide between passing and making a bid that would have ended the auction at our table.

Law 27B3 tells us that offender can not double unless it shows the sames as (or is more precise than) 1H.

To apply the law, the TD needs to understanding the meaning of 1H [probably the same as 1C-(P)-1H, but may be the same as an opening 1H] and understand the meaning of calls after 1C-(1H)-?.

All this should have been explained to partner before the non-acceptence of the insufficient bid

[movingon]

mycroft, on 2011-March-10, 17:43, said:

and, of course, the meaning of 1H overcall of a Precision 1C, and whether 1H was a mispull and 2H (for instance, but pass or 3C is much less likely a mispull) was intended.

The 1 overcall showed hearts. The 1♥ insufficient bid by LHO was not a mis-pull. She indicated to director that she did not see my 1♥overcall.

I only bring that up because I play Precision, and only about half my opponents' 1H overcalls actually show hearts. If this one doesn't, it is quite likely that 2H would be natural.

Having said that, my partnership had better not do this, because while 2H might be natural after 1H-showing two non-touching suits, 1H shows *spades*, so we're out of luck. Of course, if 1H *was* natural, 2*D* would be "game-forcing, with spades"; I might be able to convince the TDs that 27B1b applies.

LHO hand:
♠94
87532
A875
KQ


Robin's argument about "care" is strongly seconded.