[the_clown]

Vulnerable against not, In a recent MP tournament I held something like Axx xxx AKQ10xx x . LHO opens 1♣, alerted as 15+HCP, 2+♣ (their convention card stated the same).I assumed it was forcing, since there was no upper range to be seen. Partly because I wasnt sure if we shoukd play our defence to strong club here, partly because I hoped they end in some number of NT, I decided to pass.

I was very surpised when it went all pass. They made 2, which was a very bad board for us.

Do you think that it would be ridiculous to call the director?

Thnx in advance.

[Vampyr]

Presumably it was RHO who opened 1♣?

I think that if this opening bid was unlimited and non-forcing, the latter should have been included in the explanation.

But it may have been forcing... did you pass in tempo?

[the_clown]

Vampyr, on 2013-January-14, 17:06, said:

Presumably it was RHO who opened 1♣?

I think that if this opening bid was unlimited and non-forcing, the latter should have been included in the explanation.

But it may have been forcing... did you pass in tempo?

Yes, Dummy had King fourth of clubs and nothing else.

[c_corgi]

I think that whether it was forcing or not forcing should have been specified in the explanation.

However, it is not clear to me that 1C being non-forcing would affect either of your stated reasons for passing.

[the hog]

the_clown, on 2013-January-14, 16:47, said:

Vulnerable against not, In a recent MP tournament I held something like Axx xxx AKQ10xx x . LHO opens 1♣, alerted as 15+HCP, 2+♣ (their convention card stated the same).I assumed it was forcing, since there was no upper range to be seen. Partly because I wasnt sure if we shoukd play our defence to strong club here, partly because I hoped they end in some number of NT, I decided to pass.

I was very surpised when it went all pass. They made 2, which was a very bad board for us.

Do you think that it would be ridiculous to call the director?

Thnx in advance.

Nope. Serves you right for passing. Was it forcing?

[the_clown]

the hog, on 2013-January-14, 18:21, said:

Nope. Serves you right for passing. Was it forcing?

They didnt specify it is forcing. But I couldn imagine they anyone could play unlimited openings and not forcing.

[TylerE]

I suspect they're playing weak NT, perhaps with a precision-style 2♣ opening in addendum.

As soon as the description included 2+♣ I would assume NF.

In any case, IMO

A: Asking should not give any UI here, especially online (you don't specify if this was on BBO or in person, or specify a jurisdiction)
B: By failing to ask you (at least as the ACBL tends to interpret things) significantly weaken any claim you might have after the hand - players are expected to take reasonable measures to protect themselves.
C: Another possiblity is that they are playing some sort of Kennedy Club/Montreal Relay type system where the 1♣ promises a 4 card major. If so, boos to them for not alerting that bit - I ran into with a local pair here that started playing it and were rather lazy in their disclosure.

[Bbradley62]

What general bidding system is this? Is there a strong, forcing and artificial opening? If I'm playing 2/1 and partner opens 1♣, and RHO asks what that shows, I think I'd say "11+ points and 3+♣". I don't think it would ever occur to me to say "11-21 points and 3+♣".

[aguahombre]

"Serves you right for passing" (Hog) would not be accurate for everyone; I don't know, in OP's case, because it is unclear what his methods over big club are.

Many pairs have methods where passing the forcing club and then bidding later shows a much better playing hand than direct action would. A pair with that agreement would definitely have a case, here; I don't believe it was careless to assume from the given explaination that 1C was forcing.

[blackshoe]

the_clown, on 2013-January-14, 16:47, said:

Do you think that it would be ridiculous to call the director?

No, I don't. You might not get a favorable ruling, but calling is certainly not ridiculous.

TylerE, on 2013-January-14, 18:40, said:

B: By failing to ask you (at least as the ACBL tends to interpret things) significantly weaken any claim you might have after the hand - players are expected to take reasonable measures to protect themselves.
C: Another possiblity is that they are playing some sort of Kennedy Club/Montreal Relay type system where the 1♣ promises a 4 card major. If so, boos to them for not alerting that bit - I ran into with a local pair here that started playing it and were rather lazy in their disclosure.

B. is not entirely true. Players who by expertise or experience can be expected to know what's going on are expected to protect themselves. That does not appear to be the case here.
If C is the case, then there has been MI, and the director should probably adjust the score.

[glen]

the_clown, on 2013-January-14, 16:47, said:

... alerted as 15+HCP, 2+♣ (their convention card stated the same) ...

Did you look at any other part of their cc? For example in the ACBL at the top of the card to see the name of the system, if any, and what opening, if any, was strong and forcing.

[Phil]

How can a bid that shows 15+ NOT be forcing?

[the hog]

Just like a 13+ Pass can be non-forcing. No one is forcing you to bid if rho hitches.

[the_clown]

glen, on 2013-January-14, 21:56, said:

Did you look at any other part of their cc? For example in the ACBL at the top of the card to see the name of the system, if any, and what opening, if any, was strong and forcing.

The system discription was really unclear to me, but I remember it didnt say strong club or something similar. They were using a mini convention card, where there is no field to specify this. We were playing only 2 boards against them, so in a limited time I couldnt go throw all openings and responses to try and understand the system logic. All I could do is scan quickly and couldnt find for example a strong or GF 2♣ opener.

[the_clown]

aguahombre, on 2013-January-14, 20:12, said:

"Serves you right for passing" (Hog) would not be accurate for everyone; I don't know, in OP's case, because it is unclear what his methods over big club are.

Many pairs have methods where passing the forcing club and then bidding later shows a much better playing hand than direct action would. A pair with that agreement would definitely have a case, here; I don't believe it was careless to assume from the given explaination that 1C was forcing.

We play transfers agains big club, which could get us in a lot of trouble especially vul. I talked to my partner later, a player who has been playing for 40 years and has international experience, and he said that he would have taken any bid for a transfer here.

[Cyberyeti]

TylerE, on 2013-January-14, 18:40, said:

I suspect they're playing weak NT, perhaps with a precision-style 2♣ opening in addendum.

As soon as the description included 2+♣ I would assume NF.

In any case, IMO

A: Asking should not give any UI here, especially online (you don't specify if this was on BBO or in person, or specify a jurisdiction)
B: By failing to ask you (at least as the ACBL tends to interpret things) significantly weaken any claim you might have after the hand - players are expected to take reasonable measures to protect themselves.
C: Another possiblity is that they are playing some sort of Kennedy Club/Montreal Relay type system where the 1♣ promises a 4 card major. If so, boos to them for not alerting that bit - I ran into with a local pair here that started playing it and were rather lazy in their disclosure.

Fantunes 1♣ is similar to this but is forcing.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the problem is, they did alert the 1C opening bid, and nobody knowes, what
they would have told, if asked.

I understand, why you did not want to ask, ..., you decided the information
on CC was enough, to be sure, you get a 2nd chance, which did not materialize.

In the end I dont think, that a called TD will rule in your favour, but maybe
he will ask the pair to madify their CC, to state clearly, that a 1C opening
is NF.

What it boils down is, Was the information on the CC sufficent? And also given
that it was the Mini CC, room is very scare. Common Practice?

If 1C is their strongest bid, ..., than passing could be constructed as fielding
a possible psych, but psyching your strongest opening bid is not allowed, ...,
very far fetched, and this is a possible outcome, if the TD knowes his customers.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

Call the director and explain the issue, trying to get the following question asked: (you get the director to do the asking)

Question to responder: how did you know opener didn't have a 30 count ?

If he says "we open Y on that" they get done for inadequate disclosure for not putting 15-22 or whatever.

If he says well RHO seemed to be counting his points for a while they'll be let off.

If he flounders a bit the director has an issue. I've met pairs in club bridge who open really big hands slowly and this governs how forcing they are ...

[aguahombre]

P_Marlowe, on 2013-January-15, 10:27, said:

the problem is, they did alert the 1C opening bid, and nobody knowes, what
they would have told, if asked.

The OP states: "LHO opens 1♣, alerted as 15+HCP, 2+♣ (their convention card stated the same).I assumed it was forcing, since there was no upper range to be seen."

That means to me the alert was asked and answered, without mentioning 1C was not forcing ---and that the convention card says the same thing as what responder said.

The ACBL CC has a section where forcing openings are specified via chk box, and we don't know if that CC was in use or whether that area was filled in. However, the CC is evidence of whether their explanation matches their agreement; when a question is answered, the opps should not have to look at the CC for confirmation.

I believe failure to mention that the bid is non-forcing is misinformation, since "15+" would lead any reasonable person to assume forcing.

[barmar]

I wonder if opener was as surprised as you were that his partner passed. What's their actual agreement? It's possible that their agreement is that it's forcing, but responder took a position, got lucky that it worked, and you were simply fixed.