Appeal No. 2

Round 10 - Table 6 - Open Room
Canada v Egypt

Appeals Committee: Brian Senior (Chairman), Stefan Back, Ismael Del'Monte. Also present, Joan Gerard (Tournament Appeals Chairman), without voting rights as North American team involved in appeal.

Board 1. Dealer North. None Vul.
	♠ Q J 4 2 ♥ A Q 10 4 3 ♦ 3 ♣ 6 4 2
♠ A 8 ♥ 6 ♦ K J 10 8 7 4 2 ♣ J 9 8		♠ 9 7 6 3 ♥ 7 ♦ A Q 6 5 ♣ A Q 10 5
	♠ K 10 5 ♥ K J 9 8 5 2 ♦ 9 ♣ K 7 3

West	North	East	South
Tawfik	Wolpert	Noshy	Demuy
	Pass	1♦	1♥
2♥(i)	4♥	Pass	Pass
5♦	All Pass

(i) Invitational plus with diamond support

E/W System: Strong NT, Five-card majors, 1♦ = 4+ diamonds
Play: ♥9 to six, ace and seven; ♣6.
Table result: N/S -400.
Result in other room: N/S -400

Appealing Side: N/S

TD's Statement of Facts:
After East had claimed eleven tricks at trick five, North summoned the TD. He had asked for an explanation about E/W's methods. East explained that they open 1♣ with4-4 in the minors, except when 4-4-4-1. North asked specifically what with 4-1-4-4, 1♦? He believed that he got the answer, 'No'. East insists that he just pointed to his previously written answer. If East is 4-1-4-4, North needs to play a spade, if East has Kxxx, xx, AQxx, A10x, he needs to play a club to avoid South being endplayed (an elimination then a club to the ten).

Law References: 75C, 40C

TD's Ruling:
Score stands; East did not give incorrect explanation (nor misbid).

TD: Marc van Beijsterveldt

The Hearing:
While understanding North's point about the necessity to switch to a spade if declarer was 4-1-4-4, the Committee saw no merit in the appeal. They believed that East's initial response to the question had been unambiguous and had covered everything that could be required of him. The fact that East stated that 4-4-4-1 was the exception had to relate to hands with 4-4 in the minors, because that was what he had been asked about and to what the rest of his reply related.

Appeals Committee Decision:
The TD's ruling stands and the deposit is forfeited.