Join Bridge Winners
Ruling

West
Ax
A10x
AKxxx
AQx
North
KQ10xx
x
Jxx
Kxxx
East
J9x
J9xx
Q10x
J10x
South
xxx
KQxxx
xx
xxx
W
N
E
S
P
P
1
X
XX
P
P
2
P
P
P
D
2 West
NS: 0 EW: 0

IMP pairs event - Conducted for Indian National Team Selection

XX shows 10+ HCP , 2 X would be penalty, 2 PASS would be forcing (up to 2N) if N was not a passed hand.

Table result was 2 making 4.

The director was called at the table by East-West and was informed that EW missed 3NT due to the 5 HCP opening by South. Director asked NS about their methods and they let him know that the opening is not in line with their 3rd seat opening agreement - at least a King less than the minimum requirement for 3rd seat opening at these colours.

Afterwards North got a call from the tournament review committee and was asked if he has seen his partner doing such things in past. He informed them that as a partnership they psyched their opening bids 3-4 times in their two years of partnership, including twice in first seat (and they have played approximately 5000 tournament deals in these two years).

The committee awarded +600 (3NT making) to EW and informed NS that the possibility of psychesshould have been mentioned in their convention card.

The ruling is correct
Procedural penalty should have been applied as well
Procedural penalty should be applied but table result should stand
Table result should stand and no procedural penalty should be applied
Other

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
loading...
122 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top