Banner

Search MSO Worldwide

 

MSO Events Mind Sports Zine Brain Power Play Games Online Community Links

Home
Site Map
What's New
Help
Mind Sports Zine
MSO Events
Brain Power
Play Games Online
Community
Links






Copyright © 1999-2000 by Mind Sports Organisation Worldwide Ltd.

E-mail:
info@msoworld.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appeal No 2

Misinformation

Committee: Jon Wittes (chair)
  Harvey Brody
  Dick Budd
  Jerry Gaer
  Dave Treadwell
DIC: Henry Cukoff

Event: Life Master Pairs, 12 August, second semifinal session

Board 3
Dealer: South
Vulnerability: E/W

    Greenspan  
6 5 4 3 2
9 4 3 2
7 6
A Q
Pollack
 
N
 
W
E
 
S
 
Moss
J 10 8
A Q
J 10 6
K Q 8 7
A 8 2
K J 9 4
10 9 7 6
J 8 4
Perry
   
K 9 7  
A 5
Q 10 5 3
K 5 3 2

West North East South
      1
Pass 1 1NT Dbl(1)
Pass 2 Pass 2
All Pass      
(1) Intended as a support double, not Alerted

The Facts: 2 made two, plus 110 for N/S. The Director was called after dummy was displayed. South believed she had made a support double. North did not believe that anyone played support doubles after 1NT overcalls. North was unsure as to the meaning of the double. The Director allowed the table result to stand since neither East nor West had any clear action.

The Appeal: E/W appealed the Director's ruling. North and West were the only players to attend the hearing. West believed that had he known South was making a support double, he might have bid 2NT. He believed that North should not have removed the double. North said that South was a relatively inexperienced player (a student of his, though a Life Master). He had explained at the table that his partner might have meant the double as Support, though he wasn't sure. He believed that removing the double was the right action with his hand.

The Committee's decision: The Committee believed that North went out of his way to explain the possibilities for his partner's double, that it was possibly meant as a Support Double, and that she was relatively inexperienced. At this point E/W could have asked North to leave the table and had South explain the intent of the double. The Committee believed that the decision North had made to bid 2 could just as well have worked out badly for his side. The result was "rub of the green" for E/W.

The Committee allowed the table result to stand and believed the appeal just barely met the standard of having merit because N/S were not totally clear on their agreement.

Appeal 2