[RMB1]

barmar, on 2017-November-11, 07:38, said:

You keep making this point, I don't think it's useful.

The usual suspects disagree.

barmar, on 2017-November-11, 07:38, said:

Similar to saying "He has an opening bid" versus "He has a hand that would be described by an opening bid".

I agree. To me "He has an opening bid" = "he has opening values" = "he has a hand that would be opened at the one-level in first or second position playing reasonably sound/traditional system". Others will disagree.

[blackshoe]

English is nothing if not imprecise.

[olegru]

blackshoe, on 2017-November-10, 19:23, said:

Yes, south clearly intended his 2NT bid as natural. Or he misbid. I suppose you could argue that a player who would misbid like this will not be awake enough to expect an alert, but I think if he bids this way the director should rule as if he did expect one. An unexpected alert or lack of alert may convey UI to the bidder. So unless 2NT was a psych, South has UI. Or at least he might have. The (lack of) alert itself is not UI, it's the information conveyed by it that is extraneous and may be unauthorized.

Sorry. I still did not get it.
Why should it matter how South intended his bid? I don't think Code have any regulation towards players intensions.
Code talks about _agreements_. Alerts for agreements, not for intensions, not for cards.
It seems for me, that you are insisting that if one player had hallucinations, director should take them as the proof of agreement.

(I may be wrong, please provide me reference to Code to prove it.)

[weejonnie]

pran, on 2017-November-11, 11:30, said:

I have always understood an opening bid to be the first bid (at whatever level it is made) in an auction. It may be preceded by up to three passes and it could also be preceded by (illegal) double(s) or redouble(s) which of course must be cancelled.

And since my pedanticometer is at a high level, it could also be preceded by bids out of rotation that are rejected.

[pran]

weejonnie, on 2017-November-13, 14:51, said:

And since my pedanticometer is at a high level, it could also be preceded by bids out of rotation that are rejected.

Sure, I forgot that

[blackshoe]

olegru, on 2017-November-13, 13:38, said:

Sorry. I still did not get it.
Why should it matter how South intended his bid? I don't think Code have any regulation towards players intensions.
Code talks about _agreements_. Alerts for agreements, not for intensions, not for cards.
It seems for me, that you are insisting that if one player had hallucinations, director should take them as the proof of agreement.

(I may be wrong, please provide me reference to Code to prove it.)

You are wrong, because that is not what I am saying. As for reference to the law, there is nothing in the law that will prove that assertion.

Are we talking about MI, or UI? As far as the MI aspect is concerned, an alert that is not required, or the lack of an alert that is required, is by law MI (see Law 20F5{a}). As for UI, an unexpected alert, or the lack of an expected alert, may convey UI (Law 16B1).

South bid 2NT directly over East's 2♠ opening. If the partnership agreement is that this 2NT shows a balanced hand of something like 15-18 HCP, which is a common agreement, then South has misbid, or he has psyched. I can't imagine psyching here, but I suppose anything is possible. However, in the EBU 2NT "unusual" requires an alert, so if South has misbid he has UI, because he would expect an alert if 2NT is unusual. If the agreement is that 2NT is natural, no alert is required, and the fact that North didn't give one is, if anything at all, evidence that North believes that the partnership agreement does not require one. So no MI. If, OTOH, the partnership agreement is that 2NT is unusual, then an alert is required, and the lack of one is both MI to the opponents and UI to South.

The question posed in the OP is "what should South do when the bidding comes around to him again, West having shown club shortage, and East having bid game in spades?" This is the question "what should a player in receipt of UI do?" From South's viewpoint, 2NT is unusual*, and requires an alert. He didn't get one. So he can infer that North thinks 2NT was natural. Whatever the agreement is, South is not permitted to take advantage of that inference.

Note that I have not said anything about the actual agreement. Investigation may lead the TD to conclude that the agreement is that 2NT is natural, or it may lead him to conclude it's unusual. Or possibly something else altogether. That conclusion is germane to the MI question, but has nothing to do with the UI question.

* If South has psyched, then he doesn't expect an alert, and so has no UI.

I hope this clarifies my position. If not, feel free to ask for more information.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2017-November-13, 17:06, said:

I hope this clarifies my position. If not, feel free to ask for more information.

I'm still confused by your first statement, "Yes, south clearly intended his 2NT bid as natural.". Surely you meant to say that he intended it as Unusual, since that's the kind of hand he had.

[blackshoe]

Sorry Barry, I was being a bit sarcastic.