[BLML] Mathe-matics

Alain Gottcheiner agot at ulb.ac.be
Wed May 26 16:08:53 CEST 2010


Eric Landau a écrit :
> On May 25, 2010, at 6:28 PM, richard.hills at immi.gov.au wrote:
>
>   
>> John Kenneth Galbraith (1908-2006), Canadian/American economist:
>>
>> "The experience of being disastrously wrong is salutary; no
>> economist should be denied it, and not many are."
>>
>> Richard Hills:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>     
>>>> So if Alain's opponents misdefended or misbid because they had
>>>> not been fully informed of the nature of his partner's 1NT
>>>> opening,
>>>>         
>> [snip]
>>
>> Alain Gottcheiner:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>     
>>> AG : You are wrong, totally wrong. They have to be informed of
>>> what the opening shows, not what my partner had.
>>>       
>> Richard Hills:
>>
>> Alain is wrong, disastrously wrong.  It is true that the
>> opponents need only be informed of the Alain-partner pre-
>> existing mutual partnership understandings, but not the actual
>> cards held by Alain's partner.
>>
>> Law 75C - Mistaken Call - second sentence:
>>
>> "Here there is no infraction of Law, since East-West did receive
>> an accurate description of the North-South agreement; they have
>> no claim to an accurate description of the North-South hands."
>>
>> Richard Hills:
>>
>> But if I was Alain's Director, I would be willing to bet dollars
>> to doughnuts that Alain-partner were disastrously wrong in
>> failing to disclose their partnership's Law 40C1 pre-existing
>> mutual _implicit_ partnership understanding that Alain's partner
>> would often deviate by opening 1NT with a 3-2-2-6 shape.
>>     
>
> Perhaps Alain's point is that with no special agreement, opening 1NT  
> with 3-2-2-6 is not a "deviation".
>
>  From "The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge" [ACBL]:  "Balanced  
> Distribution (or pattern).  A hand that appears suitable for notrump  
> rather than trump contracts.  Standard types are 4-4-3-2, 4-3-3-3,  
> and 5-3-3-2.  5-4-2-2 and 6-3-2-2 are borderline cases."
>   
AG : My point is that it is standard, and I like the way it is defined 
in Eric's excerpt.
'suitable for notrump' is a much more correct definition, if one is 
needed, than giving a set of patterns.

By the way, my first reaction at the table was : "A natural NT bid shows 
a NT-oriented hand, not a balanced hand".
I wouldn't open a 15-17 NT on  AKQx - xxx - xx - AKJx,  balanced as it is.

There is a moral in all this.
We've seen that Richard, who is a clever guy and knowledgeable in the 
field of umpiring, fell into the 'definition' trap to the point of 
seeing an invisible (pink ?) infraction.
This is a good reason to avoid working on the basis of (necessarily 
rigid) definitions.

Best regards

  Alain


More information about the Blml mailing list