[BLML] San Diego Lightfoot Sue [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

David Babcock dpb3 at fastmail.fm
Thu Jan 7 15:15:31 CET 2010

> Jeff Polisner was of the opinion that members (i.e. country federations)
> of the WBF are required to follow the WBF version of the Laws, but that
> organizations like the ACBL which is not a member may differ.

ACBL is a zonal member of WBF, and Polisner cannot be seriously saying
that USBF is the actual NO for bridge in the USA.  Where is he coming
from here?

> Gary Blaiss agreed with Polisner. The ACBL Laws Commission is responsible
> for the set of Laws used by the ACBL. He also noted that in the past
> there was cooperation between essentially the ACBL and WBF to agree on a
> uniform set of Laws. This set of laws does not follow that paradigm, and
> Blaiss would like to see a return to the previous situation of
> cooperation between the ACBL and WBF to draft the Laws of Duplicate
> Bridge.

The November 2007 ACBLLC minutes say,

"The Commission decided to accept the change in title and, in fact, *in
order to ensure that the ACBL version of the Laws is the same as the WBF
verwion*, accepts as the ACBL version the drfat approved by the WBF"
(emphasis added)

What has happened to bring about the change in attitude indicated by the
latest minutes?

and -- if having seven ACBL'ers on the fifteen-member WBFLC isn't enough
to ensure WBF/ACBL cooperation in law-making, what "return to [a]
previous situation" is envisioned?

David Babcock

More information about the Blml mailing list