Re: subject now becoming clearer

World Chess Champion Jose Raul Caplanca said:

"The good player is always lucky."

The lucky Gordon Rainsford suggested that the actual Director perpetrated a Director's Error.

The unlucky Herman De Wael wants to discuss an irrelevant unanimous poll.

The unlucky Richard Hills proposes this opening lead problem:

RHO opens 1H, LHO responds 2D, RHO shows extra strength with a "high reverse" of 3C, LHO tries a fourth suit forcing 3S, for which pard makes a lead-directing double, RHO rebids 4C, LHO jumps to 5H and RHO concludes with 6H. You hold:

QT63
76
AT652
82

What is your opening lead?

Best wishes,

Richard Hills

Sent from my iPad

> On 30 Oct 2017, at 8:49 AM, Gordon Rainsford <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> It doesn’t sound as though, had it been considered a serious error, it would have been unrelated to the infraction.
>  
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>  
> From: Herman De Wael
> Sent: 29 October 2017 21:36
> To: blml
> Subject: [BLML] subject now becoming clearer
>  
> I posted this week:
>  
> They are vulnerable, you're in second seat, after the bidding:
>  
> decl        you        dummy part
> 2Cl          Pass       2Sp         Pass       2Cl=strong  2Sp=relay
> 3He        Pass       3Sp         Pass       natural
> 3NT        All Pass
>  
> And you have to lead from:
>  
> Sp K Q 9 7 5 2
> He Q J 10 8
> Di 9
> Cl 6 3
>  
> Your lead?
>  
> There have been many different leads (I believe all four suits have been
> suggested)
>  
> Now I'll tell you what happened:
>  
> 3Sp was intended, by Dummy, as a second relay. He has only two spades.
> Offending side told the TD that this was a misbid, and it should have
> been natural - so East was not misinformed.
> However, the TD ruled that this was not proven and he ruled misinformation.
> But that's not the end of the ruling.
>  
> It is clear that without the mention of natural spades in dummy, a spade
> lead is mandatory. In that case, the contract goes two down. That is
> what the TD ruled for the offending side.
>  
> At the table, the lead was a club and declarer made 11 tricks.
>  
> Now, the TD polled six players, like I did you, and received six answers
> of a spade lead even after the misinformation.
> I am not criticising this, different polls do lead to different results.
>  
> Based on this poll the TD of the hand ruled serious error and left the
> score of -660 for the non offending side (leaving the final result of
> the match at 18-9 on the ancient scale).
>  
> My question is the following:
> Is it enough for a poll to be unanimous in order to rule that the club
> lead was a serious error as indicated by the new laws?
>  
> Herman.
>  
> Herman.
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>  
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml