[gnasher]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 04:15, said:

paulg and nigel_k considered pass an LA, and Trinidad would select it at matchpoints. campboy did not choose a camp. Nigel_K "slightly prefers 4H". Most do not consider Pass an LA, say 8 people.

Actually, Trinidad only said that he leant towards pass. I agree that this probably meets the condition in the laws that "some might choose it", but I'm not sure that is true if you interpret the law as the EBU does, which is that "more than just an isolated exception" "would actually choose it".

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-October-22, 06:29

[Cyberyeti]

I'm not convinced partner will value the right hands as I know he's aceless. Partner may not realise xx, KJxxx, KQx, Kxx is a great hand the way I've bid but KJ10, Kxxx, Qxx, KJ10 isn't. If you don't open the first one 1N, make curly suits 4-4 and you'll still make 6 most of the time.

I haven't made any sort of slam try yet, I will do so with 4♣ and see if partner goes beyond 4♦.

Pass is not an option for me.

[lamford]

 gnasher, on 2012-October-22, 06:26, said:

Actually, Trinidad only said that he leant towards pass. I agree that this probably meets the condition in the laws that "some might choose it", but I'm not sure that is true if you interpret the law as the EBU does, which is that "more than just an isolated exception" "would actually choose it".

But nigel_k might presumably also choose pass as well, if he only "slightly prefers 4H". Perhaps we should have single transferable votes as the sample size is generally small. And Vampyr would actually choose Pass, even though she does not make this clear. And I would choose Pass now, even though I think it is a poor bid, as I consider it an LA based on the views of others.

[gordontd]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 06:37, said:

I would choose Pass now, even though I think it is a poor bid, as I consider it an LA based on the views of others.

By this logic, we will soon be of the opinion that bidding is not an LA!

[gnasher]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 06:37, said:

I would choose Pass now, even though I think it is a poor bid, as I consider it an LA based on the views of others.

The phrases "would be given serious consideration" and "might select it" in the laws obviously refer to what one would do if unconstrained by UI. Otherwise, as Gordon says, we would reach the absurd conclusion that pass was the only LA.

[lamford]

 gordontd, on 2012-October-22, 06:45, said:

By this logic, we will soon be of the opinion that bidding is not an LA!

Not at all, and the same response to gnasher. The word "now" was the clue to the correct meaning. We are unable to conduct a poll before we bid - although I was told by mgoetze that a fun bridge event in Germany includes a "phone a friend" and "ask the audience" option! I stated that I would bid given it as a problem without UI. If I had the results of this poll (or just the results of those I polled at Stratford), then I would pass as I would now know that Pass seemed to be an LA.

At the table, my partner and I bid, poorly: 1NT - 2C - 2D - 3D - 3NT - Pass. 3D was a natural slam try here. I will not say which of us bid 3NT. The 3NT bidder was hampered by the agreement that a raise to 4D would be RKCB.

So there is no contradiction whatsoever in choosing to bid at the table, believing Pass not to be an LA, and adjusting to "Pass" (in a UI ruling) after a poll is conducted. Are you saying that if virtually the exact hand occurred tomorrow, with the same UI, you would still move?

[RMB1]

 lamford, on 2012-October-21, 18:39, said:

I was also told by the appellant that the AC were close to retaining his deposit! (Perhaps TDs present at Stratford can confirm or deny any of these facts).

+

[gordontd]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 07:55, said:

So there is no contradiction whatsoever in choosing to bid at the table, believing Pass not to be an LA, and adjusting to "Pass" (in a UI ruling) after a poll is conducted.

No, there isn't, but you were saying that you would give as an answer to the question of what you would do at the table, that which you believe to have subsequently been indicated by others as what they would do.

This reminds me of a student politician I knew who would only support policies that he believed were supported by the majority of the electorate.

[lamford]

 gordontd, on 2012-October-22, 08:32, said:

No, there isn't, but you were saying that you would give as an answer to the question of what you would do at the table, that which you believe to have subsequently been indicated by others as what they would do.

This reminds me of a student politician I knew who would only support policies that he believed were supported by the majority of the electorate.

The difference is that I now know (or believe) Pass to be an LA, and have to select it regardless of whether I think it is the best bid. I am answering the question with extra information.

The student politician is not obliged to believe that the majority is correct, but can choose to do so without breaking the law. Parliament does not support capital punishment although 54% of the country supports it. There are those that want a referendum and for the majority view to prevail. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with that.

And I think we are drifting off-topic. Is there any more information on the facts of the appeal?

[Trinidad]

I find this discussion rather fruitless. What you do depends entirely on what you have shown so far.

For some, e.g. gwnn, the auction up to 3♠ merely shows game going values. In that case, it is obvious that you have to make some kind of slam try and pass would never, ever be an LA.

In the style that I am used to, the auction up to 3♠ shows mild slam interest. The 1NT opener is allowed to take the initiative and force to slam if he has a suitable hand. I have written (or intended to write) that I could go either way, at MPs, using that style, and lean towards pass. That means that my opinion is that pass is an LA if NS would play that style.

It is not a good idea to start adding the votes from the proponents of each style, evaluate the numbers and state something to the effect of: "x % consider pass and y % would actually pass, there for pass is/isn't an LA.".

It is much better to just ask NS what North has shown in the auction.

If NS answer that it implies slam interest, then consider it as such and throw out all the votes of people who think that North has merely shown game going values. You will be stuck with my vote.
If NS answer that it merely shows game going values, then consider it as such and throw out all the votes of people who think that North has implied slam interest. Please discard my opinion and don't misuse it for a purpose that it wasn't intended for.

Rik

[lamford]

 RMB1, on 2012-October-22, 08:09, said:

+

As that seems to be a confirm, are you also able to clarify the NS methods, in particular what 1NT-2C-2D-3D would mean and whether the chosen sequence was a slam-try?

[aguahombre]

 Trinidad, on 2012-October-22, 09:37, said:

It is much better to just ask NS what North has shown in the auction.

If NS answer that it implies slam interest, then consider it as such and throw out all the votes of people who think that North has merely shown game going values. You will be stuck with my vote.
If NS answer that it merely shows game going values, then consider it as such and throw out all the votes of people who think that North has implied slam interest. Please discard my opinion and don't misuse it for a purpose that it wasn't intended for.

Rik

Upon further reflection, this is the correct way of looking at it. On even further reflection, if we have implied slam interest partner has taken extra time to come up with a bad bid ---I am not used to this happening, and would have to pass 3NT.

If the auction merely has shown game going values, partner still has taken extra time to come up with a bad bid..JXX in an off-suit might suggest NT is not the right spot; but, suitability for slam in diamonds is still in the picture from responder's standpoint even if opener has something like XX KXX KQXX KJX (possible, if the auction wasn't slammish up to this point and opener will expect responder to bid again if interested).

[RMB1]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 10:01, said:

... , are you also able to clarify the NS methods, in particular what 1NT-2C-2D-3D would mean and whether the chosen sequence was a slam-try?

I was not the TD. I do not think the TD or AC asked about sequences starting with 1NT-2♣. I do not know whether the chosen sequence was a slam-try - I made assumptions at the time but (in hindsight) these were based on my own understandings.

[gordontd]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 05:59, said:

although with sadly dwindling numbers that is being damned with faint praise.

Actually the numbers were very slightly up this year, and last year they were significantly up on the previous year.

[lamford]

 gordontd, on 2012-October-22, 10:32, said:

Actually the numbers were very slightly up this year, and last year they were significantly up on the previous year.

I stand corrected. They should be, as the Holiday Inn, Stratford, is much nicer (and cheaper) than the NEC Hilton, if that is what it is still called.

[gnasher]

 lamford, on 2012-October-22, 09:24, said:

The difference is that I now know (or believe) Pass to be an LA, and have to select it regardless of whether I think it is the best bid. I am answering the question with extra information.

There are two different questions:
(1) What would you do or consider doing in an unpolluted auction?
(2) What would you do when constrained by UI?
When conducting a poll in order to determine what is an LA, we are interested in the answer to (1), not (2).

As I understand it, your answers would be (1) 4♥ and (2) Pass. In your earlier post (no 43), you seemed to imply that this met the condition "would actually choose [Pass]". It doesn't - all it tells us is that you think Pass is an LA.

[lamford]

 gnasher, on 2012-October-22, 10:49, said:

There are two different questions:
(1) What would you do or consider doing in an unpolluted auction?
(2) What would you do when constrained by UI?
When conducting a poll in order to determine what is an LA, we are interested in the answer to (1), not (2).

As I understand it, your answers would be (1) 4♥ and (2) Pass. In your earlier post (no 43), you seemed to imply that this met the condition "would actually choose [Pass]". It doesn't - all it tells us is that you think Pass is an LA.

Yes to the answers. But no, I was not arguing that the fact that I would pass now contributed to making it an LA in any way. And I would have thought the word "now" made that clear. As both you and gordontd have misinterpreted what I wrote, it was clearly badly written, and I should have written "Originally when given it as a problem without UI, or with UI, I would have bid on". "Now I would bid on without UI and pass with UI, as I now think that Pass is an LA as a result of talking to, and polling, some very strong players". I do not know who the "offenders" were, so I cannot tell whether Pass would be an LA for them. And I do not know the methods of the pair, nor what other sequences or subsequent sequences would mean, so I am partly guessing.

The overriding consideration for me is that I know any noise gets a Six Diamond bid, and that is surely a breach of 73C.

Bad writing is more than a matter of ***** syntax and faulty observation - Stephen King

And I like the censor program!

[gwnn]

No, you don't *know* that. Perhaps 3S was not a slam invite, perhaps partner was thinking of 4-3 spade fit or perhaps he has a hand that is very bad for diamonds and will still sign off in 5D. It is yhe likeliest case that he will accept a slam try now but not by as much as you are implying.

[lamford]

 gwnn, on 2012-October-22, 11:21, said:

No, you don't *know* that. Perhaps 3S was not a slam invite, perhaps partner was thinking of 4-3 spade fit or perhaps he has a hand that is very bad for diamonds and will still sign off in 5D. It is yhe likeliest case that he will accept a slam try now but not by as much as you are implying.

So what else was he thinking of bidding? The auction is already at Three Spades. And even his thinking about playing the Moysian makes your hand better as he will have less in the rounded suits.

[gwnn]

The probability rising and the probability being 100% are two different things.