Norway vs Latvia

Appeals Committee:

Joan Gerard (Chairman, USA), David Stevenson (Scribe, England), Grattan Endicott (England), Jeffrey Polisner (USA), Bobby Wolff (USA)

University Teams Round 9

Board 9. Dealer North. East/West Vulnerable.
	ª A © J 10 8 5 3 2 ¨ Q 9 2 § A 9 3
ª K J 10 6 3 © Q 7 6 ¨ A 8 7 4 § Q		ª 9 8 7 5 2 © A K 4 ¨ 10 § K 10 8 5
	ª Q 4 © 9 ¨ K J 6 5 3 § J 7 6 4 2

Comments:

(1) Forcing for one round (explained both sides of screen)
(2) West asked South: South said less than 16, but not minimum, +/- 15-16

Contract: Two hearts, played by East

Result: 8 tricks, NS +110

The Facts: West stated that if he had known North could have been weaker (as he was) he could have balanced. The Convention card just said that 1]=1NT=2NT showed 16+, nothing about 1]=1NT=2].

The Director:

We felt West had been damaged but

1. East/West had been cautious until now; on balancing it is less plausible to reach game

2. Only a few pairs reached 4[ (10 out of 22)

Therefore we adjusted the score.

Ruling: Score adjusted to 2[+2 by West, NS -170 to both sides

East/West appealed.

Present: All players

The Players:

East/West said: On a balance vulnerable versus non-vulnerable, we always have a good hand, especially when opponents haven't shown a fit. As East I would have considered bidding either 3], showing a good 3[ raise with ] values, or maybe a direct jump to 4[. We feel that the side who is hurt (us) should be given a beneficial judgement (+620). (I know we have ten spades and the opener has the }A.)

The Committee:

Noted that West's "question" was merely a look. South proffered an explanation: he was slightly confused, and in fact the correct description of 2] is 12-15 or 12-16. At the Committee South agreed that he gave the wrong explanation.

The Directives of the Code of Practice laid down that the Appeals Committee should take full account of that ruling, and this was done in the deliberations. Furthermore the Committee took into account the level of competence of the event.

Relevant Laws:

Law 21C, 12C3.

The Committee's decision:

There was misinformation. It was possible that East would balance with correct information, and possible that, if so, game would be reached.

Score adjusted to 50% of 2]= by North, NS +110, 20% of 2[+2, NS -170, 30% of 4[=, NS -620 to both sides

Deposit: Returned

Page 5 of 5