[nige1]

pescetom, on 2018-November-26, 14:26, said:

As an aside, an article on one of the last numbers of the Bridge d'Italia magazine mentioned a case in which during an international tournament an elderly player interfered 3♣ as natural, confounding his partner. The player was none other than Pierre Ghestem

Brilliant and apposite Ghestem article by David Burn on David Stevenson's web-site, starring Pierre

[pescetom]

nige1, on 2018-November-26, 14:49, said:

A brilliant and apposite Ghestem article by David Burn on David Stevenson's web-site, starring Pierre

Probably the same anecdote recycled
My list of "conventions you don't need to know" is long and probably contentious on BBO, so to save myself I'll choose the 2♣ Crodo opening, invented by another genial frenchman, Pierre Albarran. A few years ago it was so common here that it wasn't even alerted, nowadays it is fast disappearing, alas because it almost invariably sputters out in a missed slam.

[steve2005]

lamford, on 2018-November-26, 06:34, said:

Unless we have clear evidence of communication, we cannot decide that North has UI. His 3D bid shows that he did not trust South's misbid of 3C. If that was through body language, then that is unfair, and North would normally treat 4C as a cue bid for diamonds. If South bid a quick 4C, folded up his hand and started to right down the contract, I would adjust to 6Dx-2. North has a great hand if South does have the red suits. Assuming there was no UI it is, as weejonnie pointed out, a fielded misbid and there is no redress for that.

All those diamonds make it possible that partner has forgotten. If that is all advancer is using to field mistake that is fine.
If partner does have the reds they may be sorry for only bidding 3♦ lol

[cherdano]

helene_t, on 2018-November-26, 14:42, said:

South has UI from the alert and must make sure she doesn't do anything that is suggested by that UI. 3♥ or pass it is, therefore.

Assuming she bids 3♥, North will probably bid 4♥, since South has shown 6♥5♦ with extras. Maybe North should even make a slam try but I suppose that can't be expected at this level.

So 4♥ is the most likely end contract. 4♥x-1 would be my ruling in a jurisdiction that rarely uses weighted scores, but in EBU probably some weighted score would be needed.

How do you get to 4H-1? Win spade lead, draw two trumps, run clubs seems an easy make. Ducking a spade doesn't change that. Playing three trumps on the other hand would lead to down many, but I don't see why South would do that.

[RMB1]

Where I wrote "majors", I meant "red suits".
Where I wrote about awarding an adjusted score, I meant for both sides.

[VixTD]

pescetom, on 2018-November-26, 14:26, said:

I'm surprised you weren't more scathing about the rules here, in particular the fact that EBU seems to allow fielding in absence of proven UI.

The EBU used to apply a fixed penalty of 60%/40% for fielded misbids that got the offenders a better score than 40%. They changed this a few years ago to bring English practice into line with other jurisdictions (and more into line with the laws), so I don't think it's fair to portray the EBU as being out on a limb in their handling of fielded misbids.

[pescetom]

VixTD, on 2018-November-27, 08:07, said:

The EBU used to apply a fixed penalty of 60%/40% for fielded misbids that got the offenders a better score than 40%. They changed this a few years ago to bring English practice into line with other jurisdictions (and more into line with the laws), so I don't think it's fair to portray the EBU as being out on a limb in their handling of fielded misbids.

Fair enough. I mentioned the EBU to avoid somebody pointing out that it was their regulations in action here, not because I doubted their motivations or judgement. It's not the RA's job to improve the laws, but maybe the WBF should. I would certainly be happier with the old penalty.

[weejonnie]

The EBU have a lot to say on fielding - but in general if you alert the bid and add 'but partner has forgotton in the past' then you are OK. If you suspect from partnership knowledge that partner may forget and don't say then you could be penalised for playing an illegal convention. You can field if you can tell from your own hand that partner has misbid e.g. shows 3 Aces when you hold 2. In this case the diamonds in the North hand suggest that South has mis-bid: but if they are a regular pair then the call should have been alerted. I would hope the explanation is

"Systematically shows the red suits but partner has beeen known to forget. We have previously played 3♣ as a strong jump overcall (if that is what has happened in the past)."

Obviously the spectre of UI still lurks.