Refused to explain
Hi everyone.
I would like some advice to pass on to someone please.
A 2NT overcall of a multi 2D opener was made and next to bid asked that player's partner what the bid meant. Was basically ignored and then when asked again told something along the lines of "I don't need to tell you". When pressed said I don't know. Eventually the player doing the asking became declarer in a slam and it was doubled by the overcaller's partner! That person had no values at all to double on. When declarer commented on the double he said he knew his partner had 15-16 points.
Alarm bells ringing as you can imagine.
I asked affected player if they called the Director. She said she didn't because the Director was a good friend of the offender and they had no confidence they would do anything about it. I suggested to her she take this further as surely it is cheating to say you don't know when you do know so that you can get a good board. She should take it to the club's Match Committee. BUT guess who is chair of that? He is a very prominent figure in the club and the declarer felt that he was both very rude and also a cheat but really didn't know what to do about it.
Any advice?
Ed
Latest Posts on this Thread
- GILES HANCOCK12 Jun 2017 at 12:38AM
Hi Ed
The Regional Chairperson or Regional Recorder might be a good person to approach for discreet advice.
cheers, Giles
- 20 Jul 2017 at 10:41PM
I'm not a director, but...
They are obliged to explain their agreements. If they have no agreement, explicit or implicit, then they would be right to say, "We don't have an agreement" and offer no more.
The hard bit is that if my partner was a good player I'd be quite sure they mean it as strongish, balanced. I might be unsure of the exact range without discussion, but it would be of that theme. If I was confident enough of my partner's level I might then add after the no agreement bit something like "The standard practice that I'd expect from [insert name here] is strong and balanced, but that is my view of the standard practice not something we have talked about". While trying to be helpful that might present my partner with an ethical problem if he or she has been a fool and done it with both minors.
If my partner was average or weak (or my opponents were good players - in which case they can make their own decisions) I'm be less sure what it means, not try to be more helpful.
It gets a bit hard when my response depends on who my partner is, and my assessment of their (and my opponents) ability, but that seems to be what it must be.
The "we don't have an agreement" response is kinda what happened at your table in question, albeit in a very impolite manner. I would also be cautious of how the events at the table were relayed to you - even an honest account may not be accurate. Could it have been more like, what do you take from that getting "we have no agreement"... you must tell me getting "no"... and the comment at the end being "I was pretty sure what you had pd (as indeed he might be.
In a strange way the final double might be an attempt at being ethical. It is probably a very good board if it is going light, and pass might be a bit of a double shot in case partner has both minors? I doubt your behind the back instead of to the director complainers would see it that way however. Sorry, I do get a bit concerned when people run around moaning about other players rather than simply get the director and let them do their job.
You need to be logged in to reply to threads.
Click here to log in.
Click here to log in.
