[paulg]

This came up in Pau and I wondered what those who regularly play with screens actually do. There was no problem at the table but caused a discussion within my team of the 'right thing to do'.

Suppose RHO opens 1♦ and you make a weak jump overcall in clubs, duly alerted (as it is weak). When asked, you remember that your 3♣ call is conventionally a Ghestem variant and should show 5-5 in clubs and spades.

What do you tell your screen mate?

There were two schools of thought:

• You should tell your screen mate your agreement
  
• You should tell your screen mate your agreement, but say that you forgot and actually have a wjo in clubs

One of the more experienced members of my team believes that (2) is the prevalent standard in top bridge. I was surprised but have little experience in this area (although I did see Ulf follow (2) in the Spingold last year against Meckwell).

What do those who regularly play with screens think?

Thanks

Paul

[TimG]

I think the Laws are pretty clear that only agreements must be disclosed.

In your case of Ghestem vs weak one-suiter, the opponents' bids probably change meaning -- for instance, a spade bid is likely a cue-bid of some sort after Ghestem, but not after a weak jump overcall -- so giving, in effect, two explanations has potential for disaster since on the other side of the screen there will be only one explanation.

[Fluffy]

the time sthis happened to me it was extremelly clear by the panic/horror face of the player who made the mistake, so no further explanation was needed.

If you have already explained it as weak, oppoenent knows what is going on, if you bid and then realise, then I think you are still free to change your own bid to 2♣ or whatever (not sure of this, but I have seen bids rectified this way a couple fo times)

[paulg]

Fluffy, on Jul 1 2008, 01:36 PM, said:

the time sthis happened to me it was extremelly clear by the panic/horror face of the player who made the mistake, so no further explanation was needed.

If you have already explained it as weak, oppoenent knows what is going on, if you bid and then realise, then I think you are still free to change your own bid to 2♣ or whatever (not sure of this, but I have seen bids rectified this way a couple fo times)

2007 Laws in Pau, so no change of 'intended' calls (which the 3♣ was).

Paul

{I intended to mean that the 3♣ bid had been alerted, but was yet to be explained to screen mate)

[NickRW]

Well, I don't know about laws or ettiquette, but if I have correctly alerted, but realised my mistake before explaining the alert, I think I merely explain our agreement. My bid is effectively then a psyche. All three parties at the table will then have the same, albeit mistaken, impression of my hand.

If I had incorrectly explained the agreement, then I think it is my duty to rectify the misinformation as soon as possible.

[barmar]

While you may feel you're doing good by explaining what you originally intended rather than your agreement, it's likely to make things even more confusing. The problem is that behind screens you only explain to your screen-mate. The other opponent will get an explanation from your partner, and it will presumably be based on your agreement, not your mistake. This can result in confusion during the auction (one opponent thinks they're cue-bidding, the other takes it as natural) and/or the defense if you end up as declarer (or if you're dummy, your mistake will clear when you lay down your cards). The end result will almost certainly be a director call.

[skjaeran]

The laws are clear here - you should only explain your agreements.

I faced this problem myself a year ago, playing the final of our national club teams championship. RHO opened 1♣ and I held a hand with a 6-card heart suit. I was evaluating my hand, and contemplating making a weak jump overcall (by bidding 2♦ showing a wjo in either major in our methods), but deciding the hand was too strong I put 1♥ on the tray without thinking....

RHO pushed the tray through the screen, and it dawned on me that we use transfer overcalls, thus I had showed spades. When the tray returned I duly alerted my overcall, and explained it as spades - correctly explaining our agreements and not my hand.

I was lucky on the occasion, when my overcalled made it impossible for our opps to find their spade slam, instead bidding to 3NT.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jul 1 2008, 10:14 PM, said:

This is not close, you should just explain your agreements. If you psyche a 1N overcall do you tell them that it is 15-18 bal but you have psyched?

Well, if you are demented and just want to screw with one of the opponents, sure! It may be even more fun watching the other guy, in the know, frsutrated at what his partner is doing or not doing. Quite a lot of humor potential, and an audience of one.

[paulg]

Thanks for the comments.

Everyone knows that the Laws only require you to state your agreements, but the multiple World Champion on my team was insistent that you should always be able to trust your screen mate and that she should tell you if she has misbid.

I'll pass on Justin's and Harald's comments and tell her she is just being old-fashioned

Paul

BTW I do not understand the comments about potential confusion if you explain your misbid. Your screen mate knows what will have been said on the other side of the screen.