[bluejak]

A correspondent says:

Scoring: MP

---

W - N - E - S
P - P - P - 1♣
1♦ - 1♥ - 2♦ - 3♠ #1
P - 4♥ - P - 4♦

#1 Alerted.

"I was called to the table after South’s 4♦ bid. South admitted, away from the table, that he had intended to bid 4♦."

How do you rule?

[Vampyr]

I guess this is a case where the insanity kicks in, ie where we have to rule according to the "meaning" of the insufficient bid. If 4♦ was intended as a good raise to 4♥ (unlikely, I admit, but partner has rebid the suit at the 4-level) then a penalty-free correction cannot be allowed. If the bid was generally forward-going and control-showing, then it seems that a penalty-free 5♦ should be permitted.

[Chris3875]

I guess the first thing is that West has the option of accepting the 4D bid. If he doesn't we need to find out whether the bid was artificial, and if so what the meaning was. If it was a genuine diamond bid (which seems odd when ops are bidding diamonds) then it could be corrected to 5D without penalty.

[Trinidad]

Nice case:

As a TD, we go back to the table and explain the options:

1) West may accept 4♦.
2) If West doesn't accept 4♦, South is allowed to:
i) bid 5♦ and the auction continues
ii) bid something else and North needs to pass for the rest of the auction

In case 1 and case 2.i, we don't need to do much more.

The interesting part comes when West doesn't accept and South bids something else.

If South passes, we rule that he has used UI from the alert of 3♠. He is supposed to think that North has a lot of hearts and a move to slam is an LA, where the UI suggests to pass.

If South bids any number of spades, he could know that he would benefit from his infraction and we adjust based on this.

I would award an AS, saying that 5♦ would be an LA. This will lead to 6♥ by North. This will go down a few on the obvious diamond lead. I don't think EW will double.

Do I still need to determine how much 6♥ is going down or will this be a 100-0 result anyway?