[BLML] L26 again

Sven Pran svenpran at online.no
Tue Jun 26 00:55:35 CEST 2012


> Tony Musgrove
[...] 
> [tony] I think your doubt is mirrored by my original doubt.  What I was
trying
> to ascertain is whether the philosophy of allowing the bidding to continue
if
> at all possible is the new thinking about L27 (sorry original misclick),
even if
> the apparent hand is not exactly congruent with the wording of the Law,

[Sven Pran] 
No, the purpose of L27B2b is to allow bidding to continue if at all possible
without indicating more possible hands with the replacement call than were
shown with the insufficient bid. Hence the "same meaning* as, or a more
precise meaning* than" clause in L27B2b.

The "simple" way to test this condition is for the Director to try if he can
find some hand with which the player would bid the replacement call in the
relevant position but would not have made the insufficient bid in the
assumed circumstances where the insufficient bid had been sufficient.

So in your auction the question TD should ask himself is:

Can I find any hand with which the player would have doubled after 1NT - 2SP
but would not have bid 2Cl after 1NT - PASS?

If he is unable to find any such hand then the Double is an acceptable
replacement call under Law 27B1b. 



More information about the Blml mailing list