[Hanoi5]

---

Director ruled average, but can anything be done by E/W to get to game/slam in clubs?

[ggwhiz]

All of them.

How much did it cost you to have the Director rule avg?

[Hanoi5]

I could answer that but then I'd be banned from the forums.

Anyway, we defeated it. And checking the results our 200 would have been better than the average we got.

West's 1st double is OK, I think. It shows the possibility of doubling one of the Majors (or both). He can double spades.

East's double doesn't look so good. Maybe a 4♣ call is in order?

West's final double is doubtful I guess, can he pass? 4♠?

[Quartic]

Assuming double of 2♦ showed interest in penalising them in a major, I have no problem with either of the first two doubles. The third I think is really bad though.

As for finding 5♣, we need to know how many clubs East has shown. If East will usually have 5+ in this sequence, I think West can bid 5♣. Otherwise West should pass and let East bid on.

I also wonder if the director's ruling is correct. I can see more than one potential issue here: North's explanation of 2♦ could be misinformation (was 2♦ systemically the majors, or natural?), and I think there's also the question whether South has used unauthorised information from North's explanation. What should 3♥ from North show over a natural 2♦? Splinter? Fit jump? Natural? Opposite some of these meanings there might be reason for South to pass or to bid 5♦.

[gszes]

given the circumstances---if w passes 4d this gives
E a chance to see the potential for a club game since
they expect no wasted values in diamonds. Their heart
honors also rate to be well placed. Slam will be tough
to bid and might easily go down on a heart to the ace
and a heart back for a ruff.

[Elianna]

Hanoi5, on 2012-April-05, 21:25, said:

---

Director ruled average, but can anything be done by E/W to get to game/slam in clubs?

Firstly, when a result is reached at the table, the director should not replace it with "average", but rather try to determine what would have happened without the irregularity (and determine the probability of it happening, plus how favorable it is to the NOS - non-offending side). I do not understand why, if the director determined you were the NOS, you would get a worse score than the one you earned at the table. And anyway, was there really an irregularity? I mean, did the director determine if 2♦ was a misexplanation or a misbid? Because if it is the latter, the director should not be changing the scores at all.

Secondly, I have a lot of sympathy with the first two doubles. But I don't think that W has his double of 4D, and if he knows what's going on, should try bidding 4S, over which I might try 5C by East. Still don't know if I get to slam (or if I want to be there - I'm guessing I don't if +200 was a good score for EW).