Re: How many questions about an opening bid before it's UI?

~snip~

> LHO asks "so when would he open 1NT instead of 1C." Partner answers
> "1NT would be completely different hand".

This isn't even an answer, it's avoiding the question.  Is it so hard
to say "12-14HCP balanced" or something similar???  At least you
respond to the question asked...

> LHO may have asked another question or two, but ended up passing.

When getting explanations like the one above, you have to ask some
more questions because they don't get answered.

> My partner ends up declaring (3NT, I believe). RHO leads a club and I
> call the TD. When she arrived, I explained that the "lead may have
> been 'inspired' [demonstrably suggested] by unauthorized information".

You're not allowed to call the TD, you're dummy and there hasn't been
drawn attention to an irregulatiry.  From the moment the lead is
visible for everyone, you become dummy, it doesn't matter if you still
hold your cards or not.
When you fear abuse of UI, you should've called the TD right after
LHO's questions and mention that there might be some UI.  If the TD
claims there's no UI, then there won't be any problem later to begin
with.  On the other hand, if the TD shares your opinion and there is
UI, opps will know that they can't use that information to their
advantage.
And even if you didn't call him earlier, you can still call him before
opps lead.  Waiting like this is just like setting up a trap for your
opponents.  You don't do anything until it's too late for them.  It's
actually quite an unethical attitude imo.

~snip~

> When the (weak) TD arrived at the table, she basically ruled that the
> lead was obvious (wrong thing to say in any case. I would have said
> "play the hand and we'll have a look after you complete play").
> Whether the ruling was right or wrong wasn't something that I was
> going to try to determine at least until after the hand was played. I
> don't even remember the result. I had called for a ruling and had
> gotten one. I moved on.

That's indeed a strange way to handle a problem.

> It appears that my LHO talked to the head of our directors'
> association and complained that I had "accused him of cheating". Well,
> first, it isn't him in any case. It would be his partner's acting on
> the UI that would be a viloation (not even cheating anymore than a
> false start caused by the center sneezing in American Football is
> cheating).
>
> Second, he mumbled something about impropper disclosure, but I am
> pretty sure that it was his own misunderstanding or failure to
> comprehend implications.

That's cowardly, I hate such people.

> The ACBL alert procedures specifically state that players are expected
> to be prepared to defend against strong 1C openers and that no
> prealert is required for them.
>
> So, my question for the group, whether you agree with me about calling
> the director or not in this particular case, is "How many questions
> can your partner ask about a bid and then pass before it demonstrably
> suggests a lead?"

It's not the number of questions that is relevant, it's the kind of
questions that may suggest a lead.  If you're asking neutral questions
like 'what possible distributions can he have', it's no problem.
However if you start asking questions like 'it doesn't necessarily
show clubs' it become borderline or too much.

Free
http://freebridge.blogspot.com