[BLML] L26 or not?
Herman De Wael
Hermandw at skynet.be
Fri Nov 19 10:18:40 CET 2010
Tony Musgrove wrote:
> At 06:58 PM 19/11/2010, you wrote:
>> Olivier raises a very interesting question.
>> We did have the following construction, under the previous laws:
>> Offender bids an insufficient Multi 2D. He corrects to 3H. Of course
>> partner had to pass. NOS go to 3NT. L26 applies, but some directors
>> misapplied it saying that hearts had been repeated, so no more lead
>> penalties. Other Directors applied L26 on hearts only. Offender had
>> psyched, partner led spades, 3 down. The true application of L26 is that
>> they remain on all suits, since the bid that dissapeared did not point
>> to a known suit.
>> In the new laws, this gets an added twist. If the replacement bid is
>> narrower than the original, it should be allowed. That means 3Cl could
>> be allowed. But if it is allowed, there are no more lead restrictions,
>> so the psychic 3Cl becomes a possibility once again.
>> Good case, Olivier, and I'm not giving an answer.
> We are going to wheel out the "could have known"
> Law so fast it will make their eyes water,
I'm not so sure about that.
Don't forget that when performing the psyche, one takes the risk of
having partner raise that suit, or of playing there in the first place.
That may well be a risk one is willing to take after the infraction, but
very unlikely before the infraction.
This is the "Rottweiler" coup, after the nickname of Richard, son of
"Mad Dog" Probst. Even John was not certain he would rule against
> Tony (Sydney)
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.869 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3264 - Release Date: 11/18/10 08:37:00
Herman De Wael
Wilrijk Antwerpen Belgium
More information about the Blml