Re: Quick question for any directors out there please.

I'm not at all sure what you mean by RON requirements.  Also, you
really need to post the full auction.

It's also unclear what the infraction was.  Was it fielding the
psych?  Failing to properly disclose something about your opening bid
style?

There's way too little information to give an informed opinion, but A+/
A- seems wrong.  These should only be used when a board cannot be
played and it is one side's fault (say, playing with travelers, North
opens the scoresheet from the wrong board) or you cannot reasonably
determine what would have happened in the absence of the infraction.
If the most favorable result for the opponents that was likely (the
33% rule) was +130, they should get +130.  However it might depend on
the auction.  If the 4C bid was on your right, you might bid out to 4S
if not vul, while if it on your left, partner might double and now the
question is whether it's reasonable for you to sit.


On Apr 28, 7:29=A0am, darren.cotter...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> Hi chaps,
>
> I was playing in a level 3 event (UK) yesterday and opened this hand
> 1S
>
> AK962
> JT987
> 62
> 2
>
> I understand it doesn't meet the RON requirement. We ended in 3S
> making (Good result opps have 4C).Opps call director and he rules in
> their favour - got awarded AV-
>
> This seems wrong to me as my partner didn't field the psych. He raised
> the to 3S with
>
> QT83
> K64
> A875
> K8
>
> Anyone have any opinions?