Hi Raymond

I'm not a National director but I would rule as follows

There were two infractions

[1]    Misinformation
and
[2]    Acting on unauthorised information

The misinformation doesn't appear to have damaged NS

East is not entitled to act on the knowledge partner has misinterpreted his bid, so he should pass 2H doubled
(the only information legally available to him is he bid showing alternative suits and partners pass said he prefers to play in 2Hx knowing that is not East's suit. East holding K3 is a very good holding in those circumstances)

According to Bridgify NS make 9 tricks defending a heart contract on a spade or small heart lead; and 8 tricks on any other lead.

Also East is duty bound to correct the wrong explanation before South leads, after which South (knowing East has the minors) would likely lead a spade.

So I would adjust to 2Hx down 4

cheers
Nick

Now let's suppose South (who is a very experienced player) becomes aware that the 3C rebid is now probably showing both minors and bids 3S. You are not called to the table until the end of play. (3S made 9 tricks)

The infraction which affects the result is the 3C bid based on unauthorised information so the rectification replaces that with the (final) pass by East.

Now, on a completely different hand where NS are playing transfers,

North opens 1NT, ( xx, KQJx, A xx, QJx)

East passes,

South bids 2H (which is not alerted),

West pass,

North pass

East doubles

South rebids 2S

All pass.

When called to the table....how do you rule?

Hi Raymond

Some tricky issues here which I have never been confident I'm fully savvy with but here goes....

The non-alert is an infraction after which:

[a] If North wakes up to his mistake he must call the director (hey I have just noticed a change in Law 20F4; the old one says immediately but the new one says before the end of the Clarification period).

[b] South must say nothing during the auction (20F5).

[c] East may change his call if he has the wrong explanation corrected provided his partner has not subsequently called

Otherwise the director adjusts to the likely result as if the correct explanation was available (only) to EW (if that is better for them than the table result)

That is likely to be East pass (final) instead of double (unless the double is penalties)

There is also the issue of NS subsequent bidding:

[d] South's 2S bid is not illegal (he has authorised information that 2S is a better contract than 2H).... BUT

[e] North is not allowed to pass that (not sure of that in view of the law change mentioned above?)

as he has a clear-cut preference to 3H in view of what he thinks partner is doing (bidding a 4-6 or 4-5 major suit hand not strong but willing to compete further)

All roads are likely to lead to an adjustment to South playing in 2H

I am interested to see other views

cheers
Nick

I fundamentally agree Nick. But wouldn't the X stand? Would you have to ascertain from West what they interperted the X as? In this sequence it would be a penalty in my world 10 times out of 10, but I live in a weird and wonderful world ...