2012 Senior USBC APPEAL #1 - ROUND OF 16 - Levine vs Brod


Brd 20                                                             N (Dennis McGarry)
Dlr: W                                                             Foot in mouth KJ
Vul: Both                                                        Embarassed 854
                                                                      Cry  3
                                                                      Cool AKT7432

W (John Lusky)                                                                                                     E (Allan Falk)
Foot in mouth AT87                                                                                                                Foot in mouth Q654
Embarassed KJ3                                                                                                                  Embarassed AQT
Cry QT862                                                                                                             Cry A97
Cool 9                                                                                                                      Cool 865

                                                                        S (Mike Levine)
                                                                        Foot in mouth 932
                                                                        Embarassed 9762
                                                                        Cry KJ54
                                                                        Cool QJ

Bidding

W     N        E     S
P     1Cool    P    1Embarassed
X      XX    2Foot in mouth   P
P     3Cool  all pass

Facts

In a contested auction, N made a support redouble and alerted E of that fact. S did not alert and when asked about the the meaning of the redouble by W, Levine just shrugged. W believed that the RDBL was therefore showing a strong hand and he therefore interpreted his partner's jump to 2S as  premptive in nature. and he therefore passed and passed again when N competed to 3Cool  which was made for 110 for N/S.

Director's Ruling

The TD ruled that the failure to alert the redouble was misinformation "MI" and that the result of that MI prevented E/W from bidding and making 4S and adjusted the table result to E/W +620. N/S appealed.

Appeals Committee Decision

The Appeals Committee "AC" initially agreed that  S's failure  to alert W of the meaning of XX and shrugging when W inquired as to its meaning was MI which may have discouraged E/W from bidding higher in Spades. The AC considered the applicable law 12C1(e) which requires awarding the non offending side (E/W) an assigned score the most favorable result that was likely had the irregularity (the MI) not occurred. The AC concluded that the combination of both bidding 4Foot in mouth and making it had it been bid did not meet the standard required by the law and as such awarded E/W+170. However, the law requires a different standard to be applied to the offending side (N/S) which is the most unfavorable result that was at all probable had the irregularity not occurred and awarded N/S  -620.

Appeals Committee Members

Jeffrey Polisner, Chair
Chip Martel
Peggy Sutherlin

Details