Club game. ACBL (obviously, since I asked in the title if EW has been damaged). NS are B players and EW are C.
After N bid 2 NT, E asked S what the bid meant. He was told it was a strong hand and a natural bid. The auction continued as shown. I was called only after the hand had been completed with NS making 7. EW stated they had been damaged because N's bid (and the NS agreement) was that the N bid was the unusual NT showing the unbid suits. As C players, I do not believe they saw an opportunity to double a contract and get the double taken away as an adjusted score - W stated that with his hand and partner having opening values, he thought he could set the contract. Perhaps by the time he becomes a B player, he will better grasp the concept of distribution.
However, in analyzing the auction, I am somewhat concerned about N's 3♦ call. Since N knows about the MI, should she be required to wait for her partner to awaken and remove the contract to safer territory? I ruled that W's first double gave N the right to get the auction back on track. W could have passed 2 NT, which makes according to double dummy. Indeed, if 2 NT X gets passed out - assuming N must pass and S hasn't awakened yet - and NS makes this contract, the scores are similar (490 v. 750 - both higher than the NV game that would have resulted from W keeping his red card in the bid box). You may question the wisdom of playing E for the stiff K♦, but they did it in 5♦ X as the hand was played, so I can't see taking this line of play away.
As always, thoughts appreciated.
Club game. ACBL (obviously, since I asked in the title if EW has been damaged). NS are B players and EW are C.
After N bid 2 NT, E asked S what the bid meant. He was told it was a strong hand and a natural bid. The auction continued as shown. I was called only after the hand had been completed with NS making 7. EW stated they had been damaged because N's bid (and the NS agreement) was that the N bid was the unusual NT showing the unbid suits. As C players, I do not believe they saw an opportunity to double a contract and get the double taken away as an adjusted score - W stated that with his hand and partner having opening values, he thought he could set the contract. Perhaps by the time he becomes a B player, he will better grasp the concept of distribution.
However, in analyzing the auction, I am somewhat concerned about N's 3♦ call. Since N knows about the MI, should she be required to wait for her partner to awaken and remove the contract to safer territory? I ruled that W's first double gave N the right to get the auction back on track. W could have passed 2 NT, which makes according to double dummy. Indeed, if 2 NT X gets passed out - assuming N must pass and S hasn't awakened yet - and NS makes this contract, the scores are similar (490 v. 750 - both higher than the NV game that would have resulted from W keeping his red card in the bid box). You may question the wisdom of playing E for the stiff K♦, but they did it in 5♦ X as the hand was played, so I can't see taking this line of play away.