(short description of image)APPEAL no. 12

(short description of image)
Appeals Committee
Chairman (short description of image)Steen Møller DEN
Members (short description of image)Nissan Rand
(short description of image)Herman De Wael
(short description of image)David Stevenson
ISR
BEL
GBR

Scribe (short description of image)David Stevenson GBR

(short description of image)
Event
1998 World Championships
McConnell Trophy Qualifying
   
(short description of image)
Countries
USA v Sweden
   
(short description of image)
Players
NS (short description of image)
(short description of image)
EW (short description of image)
(short description of image)
   
(short description of image)
Board
Board 14. Dealer East. Love All
ª 7
© K 9 4
¨ 10 8 7 3
§ 10 9 5 4 2
ª 10 9 8 6 (short description of image) ª K Q J 5 4
© A J 7 © 10 8 2
¨ A ¨ K Q J 6
§ A K Q 8 7 § 3
ª A 3 2
© Q 6 5 3
¨ 9 5 4 2
§ J 6

West
North
East
South

1ª Pass
2NT(1) Pass 3§(2) Pass
3¨(3) Pass 4§(4) Pass
4¨(5) Pass 4ª(6) Pass
4NT(7) Pass 5§(8) Pass
5ª(9) Pass 6ª All Pass

(1) GF, fit in ª
(2) Minimum
(3) Asks for shortage
(4) Shortage in §
(5) Cue-bid
(6) No H control
(7) RKCB
(8) 0 or 3 out of 4 aces + ªK
(9) After hesitation
   
(short description of image)
Result
6ª=-980
   
(short description of image)
Facts
The Director was called at the end of play. The hesitation before bidding 5ª was agreed by West, South and North, while East was not really aware one way or another. East had misbid when she bid 5§, since she had the ªK.
   
(short description of image)
TD's
Decision
5ª plus one, N/S -480

(short description of image)
Appellants
E/W
   
(short description of image)
Players'
Comments
East said that when she was asked the meaning of 5§ she immediately realised she had made the wrong bid. She made this clear to North. She was not influenced by the hesitation - in fact she was barely aware of it. She agreed that the question was asked, answered and she realised that she had gone wrong, and indicated this between sending the tray across after her 5§ bid and before it came back. She would not expect partner to have fewer than three aces to bid 4NT. She had played RKCB for many years. North said it was a long hesitation: there was a question, an answer, and expressions of surprise while the tray was away. Whatever the likelihood of three aces, it became completely clear after the hesitation.

(short description of image)
Committee's
Comments
The Committee believed that the hesitation made it easier to get the final decision correct, though different members of the Committee saw different reasons for this. One view of it was: Even if the players can prove that within the system, the bid is the only rational alternative, Law 16 talks of Logical alternatives. The Committee felt that if the tray had returned promptly, it might well have happened that the player might go wrong a second time.
   
(short description of image)
Committee's
Decision
The Committee ruled: 5ª plus one, N/S -480
   
(short description of image)
Relevant
Laws
Law 16A2, Law 12C2
   
(short description of image)
Deposit
Returned X
Forfeited  


(short description of image) Return to Top of page To main Championship page(short description of image)