[Chris3875]

I ask this question purely out of interest - we ended up playing the hand in 4C and all were happy.

South opened the bidding 1NT and North replied 3C which was alerted and explained as a transfer to diamonds. South duly bid 3D and then North bid 4C. Their system card says that 4C is Gerber except after a genuine club bid. When the 4C bid was made, South made the comment "Now I am in an ethical dilemma" and passed. Any comment on where this auction should have progressed - if at all ?

[chrism]

In the absence of any table action or partnership history suggesting that North has forgotten the transfer agreement, South is free to guess that he has done so and to pass (minus the inappropriate comment).

If North was actually exploring for a grand slam in diamonds, so be it.

[nige1]

chrism, on 2017-June-13, 18:26, said:

In the absence of any table action or partnership history suggesting that North has forgotten the transfer agreement, South is free to guess that he has done so and to pass (minus the inappropriate comment).

If North was actually exploring for a grand slam in diamonds, so be it.

Fair enough although, in practice, North, who discovers that he has misbid, sometimes breaks tempo or inadvertently indicates concern, in another other way. Then South must take care not to field the misbid (e.g. by passing 4♣).

[weejonnie]

IFF South had no unauthorised information from North then he can do what he wants. If he has experience of North forgetting conventions then he really should let the opponents know at the time of the call (The EBU have guidelines on 'fielding' a mis-bid but obviously each RA is different)

EBU WHite Book 1.4.1

"Players are required to disclose their agreements, both explicit and implicit. If a player believes, from partnership experience, that partner may have deviated from the system this must be disclosed to the opponents. If a player properly discloses this possibility, the player will not be penalised for fielding it, although there may be a penalty for playing an illegal method."

1.4.2.6 Misbids

A partnership’s actions following a misbid may provide evidence of a partnership understanding which should have been properly disclosed. Unlike psyches, misbids are not classified as red, amber or green, but can be recorded.

Because of the difference between the player’s understanding of their call and any alerts and answers to questions by their partner it is quite common for unauthorised information problems to be present.
--------------------

Of course South should have said nothing (and what he said was wrong: HE wasn't in an ethical dilemma, North was - and should have passed three diamonds unless his hand was totally unsuitable for the said contract.)

(Last night, I had the auction (North Dealer) Pass, 1♥ - 3♣ (alerted as Spades and Diamonds) from South

I passed holding 7432 J KQT963 J4

3♠ All pass)

To South's credit, holding 9 T9872 A2 AK873, she passed. 3 Spades - 6 wasn't the best result for NS -but as 4 Spades our way was going off, we weren't damaged.

[steve2005]

Chris3875, on 2017-June-13, 17:40, said:

I ask this question purely out of interest - we ended up playing the hand in 4C and all were happy.

South opened the bidding 1NT and North replied 3C which was alerted and explained as a transfer to diamonds. South duly bid 3D and then North bid 4C. Their system card says that 4C is Gerber except after a genuine club bid. When the 4C bid was made, South made the comment "Now I am in an ethical dilemma" and passed. Any comment on where this auction should have progressed - if at all ?

So, if your partner had 16+ points and good diamonds your gonna look pretty silly!
I had auction 1N-2♦-2♥-3♦ all pass. Cold for 6♥ I was not pleased with partner thinking I had forgotten that we played transfers for 20 years.