[BLML] Burn, David Burn [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
Herman De Wael
hermandw at skynet.be
Wed Jan 16 14:02:05 CET 2013
Alain Gottcheiner schreef:
> Le 14/01/2013 18:07, Herman De Wael a écrit :
>> Alain Gottcheiner schreef:
>> They both thought that in this sequence, 3D might be weak.
>> The situation is not the same as yours.
>> PS - of course they also could not prove conclusively that the bid was
> So the only evidence we have is their explanation, which happens to be
> identical on both sides ; not a small hint - notice that the player who
> bid 3D apparently realized there was a problem, but nevertheless
> described his system rather than his hand.
No, that is not the only evidence we have - we also (could) have their
explanations about other bids which would tell us that they have no way
to describe the hand in question (just diamonds, weak, no spade
support). In particular, they did not explain -as you did- that 3C would
be a re-transfer.
So we have (or could have) quite compelling evidence that the bid to
describe the hand in question is precisely the bid of 3D.
Logical conclusions from evidence at hand is also evidence.
> Sorry, but I fail to see any infraction.
Tell that to Haacht and advice them to appeal.
If you need, the case can be found on the VBL website - competitie (VBL)
- Liga 2E - match Haacht-Begijntje.
Others than Alain (and our northern neighbours) - don't bother to try
and find it - it's in Dutch.
More information about the Blml