[Cyberyeti]

I think double is suggested, pass and 2♠ are LAs, at a reasonable standard I'd say no LA to 2♠, but to beginners pass is LA.

[Vampyr]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-March-19, 04:20, said:

I think double is suggested, pass and 2♠ are LAs

Which (if any) of the latter two do you think is suggested?

[aguahombre]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-March-19, 04:20, said:

I think double is suggested, pass and 2♠ are LAs, at a reasonable standard I'd say no LA to 2♠, but to beginners pass is LA.

Vampyr, on 2013-March-19, 04:43, said:

Which (if any) of the latter two do you think is suggested?

I wasn't the one you asked, but that hasn't stopped me in the past

Defending is suggested by the type of table action which occured in the OP. Pass would lead to defending; so, pass is a L.A. (for less experienced players) demonstrably suggested.

Double is illogical and actionable.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2013-March-19, 08:59, said:

I wasn't the one you asked, but that hasn't stopped me in the past

Defending is suggested by the type of table action which occured in the OP. Pass would lead to defending; so, pass is a L.A. (for less experienced players) demonstrably suggested.

Double is illogical and actionable.

I also believe that both pass and double are suggested over 2♠ by the table action.

But the question in the OP is "Is there a logical alternative to 2♠?", which doesn't make sense. 2♠ is definitely not suggested (in the opinion of those who responded) by the table action, so it doesn't matter whether there are logical alternatives to it.

Therefore, I suspect there is a twist. Partner had spades, and didn't feel that he had enough spades or points to take action. So our action worked out well. Could we have known that partner's questions and BIT indicated a spade holding? Was there body language or previous experience that suggested to us that this was the case?

As an aside, does a weak 2♥ require an alert or announcement in the OP's jurisdiction?

[nige1]

IMO after (2♥) Pass (Pass) ??

• Your LAs are 2♠ = 10, Pass = 7, Double = 6.
• Partner's questions may well imply a ♥ holding. If that surmise is correct, the UI suggests that pass or double will work better than 2♠. Hence 2♠ is the least suggested LA.
• Partner's antics imply values, suggesting that action by you would be safe, so the director might also allow Pass.
• Double seems a No No.

[mycroft]

I'm in blackshoe's camp (which probably is strongly related to our shared regulatory scheme). When they ask about 2♥ and pass, they have values but no bid. They explicitly do *not* have hearts but no penalty double; they've learned that you have to pass that hand (usually after taking the full 10 seconds, you know they way they never do any other time).

When they ask about *1*♥, the answer is "fewer than you have, obviously". But not 2.

Oh, when they ask about 2♦, they play, and often forget to Alert, Flannery. Or they're making a "partner, please balance" call. Or they've just met too many people who don't Alert whatever 2♦ gadget they do play. Which, unfortunately, makes 2♦ a less effective preempt than it otherwise would be.

But again, around here, not 2♥ (mostly due to GCC restrictions).

[bluejak]

Cascade, on 2013-March-17, 22:17, said:

What action do you take?

2♠.

Cascade, on 2013-March-17, 22:17, said:

What other actions do you consider?

Pass.

Cascade, on 2013-March-17, 22:17, said:

If partner, breaks tempo, asks about the the unalerted 2♥ and passes do you feel constrained here.

Yes.

Cascade, on 2013-March-17, 22:17, said:

Quick answers will be good as the lesson starts in about two hours.

Sorry, I am reading this about three weeks later!

Cascade, on 2013-March-18, 04:22, said:

At the club I went to tonight for a lesson. I put this hand up as a bidding problem at the beginning just to do a poll. Later in the lesson I talked about the main issue which was the inane questions from partner who had an auto pass but with 13 hcp. In the poll 3/20 passed, 1/20 doubled and 16/20 bid 2♠.

I think this makes it pretty close to the threshold for pass being or not being a logical alternative for that group of players.

I don't agree, and am surprised others agree.

Let's extrapolate from your figures. Let's guesstimate what actions people consider.

If 3/20 pass then I think we can safely say that at least three more will consider pass.

So 30% consider pass, of whom some [15%] actually choose pass.

Those figures are well over the numbers required for an LA, which are roughly 20% and 5%.

So pass is an LA, not even close.

Double? If one chose it, maybe one more considered it. So 10% and 5%: that's not an LA.

aguahombre, on 2013-March-18, 06:33, said:

Yes, your poll suggests that pass or double are probably not logical alternatives ---and further suggests that if we did pass or double it would border on flagrant use of the UI warranting an adjustment and a PP.

First, the poll clearly does suggest that pass is an LA.

Second, even if it doesn't, the fact that partner has shown values suggests 2♠ over pass, not the reverse. So to give a PP for choosing pass would be wildly inappropriate.

The only time a PP is appropriate is when

• there is no question that partner made UI available, and
  
• the player is experienced enough and advanced enough to have some idea of UI rules, and
  
• the action chosen is one that is not just illegal but everyone who understood UI rules would realise was illegal