Cumbria Congress Conundrum
This comes from board 11 in the Swiss pairs on Sunday https://bridgewebs.com/cgi-bin/bwon/bw.cgi?pid=display_rank&event=20190929_1&club=cumbria in which I was playing.
The bidding goes (South dealer, no one vulnerable.)
S W N E
P P P 1NT (announced as 12-14)
X(1) 2H(2) 2S(3) 3H
P P 3S AP
Result NS -3 (-150)
(1) - not alerted.
(2) - not alerted.
(3) - North comments that he should have alerted the X as showing a major/ minor combination. (OK he should have called the director, but that isn't the problem).
West thought they played transfers over penalty doubles, East thought they did not.
At the end of the hand North calls the TD alleging damage. West states that he probably wouldn't have bid had he known the double was conventional and not penalty.
PS - Hope I got this version right Ken! - still not sure what the 'correct' ruling is. (I changed my mind at least 3 times)
At the table Ken and I discussed the situation and adjusted NS score since they had been damage by EW misinformation - but we didn't adjust EW score since they hadn't been damaged by NS misinformation. My other thought was to award a weighted score between 2D played by NS and 2S played by EW. If so (and if we weight the scores) should both sides get the weighting against them?)