From
	The Director's
		Corner

Law 75c or
"That's what I said, but is it what I meant?"
 

There is no doubt  that Law 75C "Mistaken Bid / Mistaken Explanation" causes more misunderstanding and hard feelings than any other law.  It is both hard to explain and hard to understand for many players, who feel they have been "done-in" when their opponent's bidding isn't what it seem to be.

A recent deal will illustrate: North opens 1NT, East overcalls 2♣, S bids 2♦ (to play). North announces the 2♦ bid as a transfer to hearts. There are 3 possibilities here:

1. Correct explanation. This is the partnership agreement, discussed and noted on both convention cards. South has probably forgotten what he/she plays with this partner.

2. Incorrect explanation. The partnership agreement is 2♦ means diamonds, again discussed , and noted on both convention cards. This time North has probably forgotten.

3. No agreement. This is the most common scenario - North and South have probably failed to discuss their agreements over interference.

In case #1 (mistaken bid) no matter what the result on the board, there will be no redress for EW. There is no infraction of law since EW have received an accurate description of the NS agreement. If EW missed a makeable heart contract chalk it up to "rub of the green", "que sera sera", or just plain hard luck - score it up and move on. The other side of the coin is that if NS played a ridiculous heart contract and EW received a top by virtue of being their opponents . . well, .the director would never have been called.

In cases #s 2 and 3 (mistaken explanation), if EW can prove damage as a direct result of the mistaken explanation, the director will adjust the score.

Now, here is the actual South hand:

North, who had opened 1NT  now rebids 2♥ over south's  2♦ call - - - What does South bid now?

Tune in to the next installment of the Directors Corner for further developments!