[pescetom]

 pran, on 2021-February-18, 14:19, said:

What puzzles me is South's bid of 2♥: North was apparently unable to open the auction and only able to PASS over Wests's opening bid of 1♣.

I just don't understand what South tries to achieve with his fairly weak hand by bidding 2♥ rather than just letting opponents play in 2♦?

What puzzles me is why West bid 4♣ showing 6-4 rather than 3♦ showing 6-5, and above all why East with 3-3 raised diamonds instead of clubs at this point. Unless I misread the auction of course.

[smerriman]

 pescetom, on 2021-February-18, 15:07, said:

What puzzles me is why West bid 4♣ showing 6-4 rather than 3♦ showing 6-5, and above all why East with 3-3 raised diamonds instead of clubs at this point. Unless I misread the auction of course.

I'm puzzled by 1♣, a pass, 2♥, 4♣, 4♦, and 5♦, but I definitely agree with 1♠

[jillybean]

 mycroft, on 2021-February-18, 10:20, said:

Ah, oops, missed that. Assuming the director hadn't been called during the auction (unclear in OP), yes, of course before the opening lead, West explains that her 2♦ call shows 18+. If she didn't, then there is yet another thing to investigate. But I'm sure that either happened or wasn't necessary.

Correct, I did not get chance to explain 2♦ before the opening lead, South called the director at the end of the auction.

Further to my comment regarding "good, experienced opposition", we were definitely the underdogs here and playing against a strong field.
My partner is an ethical player but at times, has mind blanks and could not explain the auction. There was nothing nefarious here.


I'm looking at a minor game opposite any positive response from partner. I also consider myself an ethical player (haha) and I would love to know why
I should be restricted by the BIT/UI in this auction? Is 4♣ use of UI or just a bad bid?

Edit: never mind, I understand now. Avoiding the use of UI is more difficult than I thought.