APPEAL no. 8 |

Appeals Committee
Chairman | Richard Colker | USA
Members | Becky Rogers Eric Kokish Patrick Choy Tommy Sandsmark | USA CAN SIP NOR
Scribe | Tommy Sandsmark | NOR

Event
1998 World Championships
Mixed Pairs | Qualifying
Countries
France | v | Germany
Players
NS | Carpentier | Menessin
EW | Maybach | Schreckenberger
Board
Board 10. Dealer East. Game All
| ª | 10 4 3 |
© | Q 9
¨ | Q 9 8 6
§ | K 10 9 5
ª | — |  | ª | K Q 8 6 5
© | J 10 8 7 2 | © | 4
¨ | A J 10 5 3 | ¨ | K 7 4
§ | J 6 3 | § | Q 7 4 2
| ª | A J 9 7 2 |
© | A K 6 5 3
¨ | 2
§ | A 8
West |  | North |  | East |  | South
|  |  |  | Pass |  | 2}¹
Pass |  | 2{² |  | Pass |  | 3NT³
All Pass |  |  |  |  |  |
¹ Semiforcing ² Relay ³ Explained from N to E: 'For play!'; from S to W: '5-5 in the majors'
Result
3NT+1: +630
Facts
The TD was called to the table after the play. The play went: {J to the queen, [10 to the queen and ace, ]3 to the queen, [3 to the king. Then East played a small diamond to the 10, and another small diamond came back to the king, and then a small spade from East. There was nothing on the convention card that could support South's explanation of 5-5 in the majors.
TD's Decision
The TD, as instructed by law 75, accepted North's explanation as the correct one and ruled that the table result would stand.

Appellants
E/W
Players' Comments
East was told that South had a balanced, strong hand with at least two diamonds and held back the ¨K because she assumed that South held the ¨A. She maintained that if she had known that South had 5-5 in the majors and an intermediate hand, she would have gone up with the ¨K either on the first or the second round of diamonds and defeated the contract. South maintained that in France, this sequence is often played to show 5-5 in the majors. She believed that North knew this. North, who was somewhat less experienced than South, did not know.

Committee's Comments
The Committee found that the footnotes under law 75 D2 forced the TD to rule any discrepancy in statements as a misexplanation and not a misbid unless one of the statements could be proved to be true. Furthermore, the Committee believed that if South's statement were true, East would have put up the {K the first or the second time if she had known. On the other hand, if North's statement were true, West might have found a better lead (e.g. the ]J) if he had known the facts. In either case the contract was likely to have gone one down.
Committee's Decision
The Committee adjusted the score to 3 NT by South, 8 tricks: -100 for N/S; +100 for E/W.
Relevant Laws
Law 75 D2
Deposit
Returned | X
Forfeited |

Return to Top of page | To main Championship page