Does an insufficient bid when accepted supersede the previous bid?
The following happened at the local club some months ago:
North opened 1NT, doubled by East, South passed and West bid 1.
East pointed out this was insufficient and before the director could be called,
West replaced the bid by a Pass. North called the director and not relishing the prospect of 1NT
stated he wanted to accept the original 1 bid which was now treated as legal (Law 27A).
North passed as did East and South.
The question is what should be the final contract?
Is it 1 , i.e. does the 1 bid supersede 1NT (as North thought)? This would seem to contradict Law 18B & C.
Or does the contract remain 1NT (as East thought); that would seem to contradict Law 19C
which states a legal bid supersedes a double or redouble.
Or is the contract 1NT which seems to comply with both 18B and 19C? So, in effect, the 1 bid acts
as the notorious Undouble ? .