[BLML] 2017 Law 40 Executive Summary [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
rfrick at rfrick.info
Sun Sep 23 16:50:18 CEST 2012
On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:14:48 -0400, Ed Reppert <blackshoe at mac.com> wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Robert Frick <rfrick at rfrick.info> wrote:
>> Anyway, no one is going to follow the actual laws, right?
> This is the fundamental flaw in your entire approach. Bluntly, it's
> bullshit. And so is making up your own laws. Either rule per the
> lawbook, or tear up your director's card. If you can't figure out how to
> rule per the lawbook, seek expert guidance. If after that you *still*
> don't get it, tear up your director's card.
ignored content: The player announced his HCP to the entire table. I think
he meant to bid but had his HCP total on his mind. I ruled that this
information was AI to the opponents and UI to his partner.
The lawbook says this is UI to both sides. I claimed that no one follows
Or maybe you are ruling that the information is UI to the opponents too.
Then your comment above makes more sense. I am guessing you are wrong
about what experts would advise. But we can check. We can even have a bet
-- $20 says that the ACBL will give the same ruling as I did, the same
ruling that seems to incense you.
If we are going to have a lawbook we can follow, we have to work for that.
You are not helping.
More information about the Blml